PDA

View Full Version : Odyssey Canon Mode



Alcachazz
07-08-2018, 12:51 AM
People, including myself, are not necessary comfortable with the idea that ac odyssey isn't canon. The tie in novel is canon with Cassandra as the main protagonist.
I think that ubisoft should include, at some point, a mode wherein we follow the footsteps of Cassandra and they remove the dialogue options. By forcing us down a more linear path we, as fans, can experience the canon version of the game.

I was wondering about everyone's thoughts on this as I haven't seen this idea out there. I apologise if someone already has and if so can someone post up a link please 😁

DaelosTheCat
07-08-2018, 01:12 AM
I think at this point nobody cares about canon or lore anymore (except for a few loyal fans).

Alcachazz
07-08-2018, 08:53 AM
That is a fair point. I know the games have moved away from their roots towards the rpg style but I used to be interested in this series for the lore.
It would be nice, although completely unlikely, to have that narrative to be a focus again.
I love rpgs but I'm not sure if I like the gender and dialogue choice aspect in assassin's creed. An extra Canon mode would allow me to enjoy oddyssey as it is but also give me the choice to have the canonical experience which I feel a lot of ac fans would appreciate. Also, having this mode may stop ubisoft trying to explain the inconsistencies with choice and the animus.

WendysBrioche
07-08-2018, 09:17 AM
People, including myself, are not necessary comfortable with the idea that ac odyssey isn't canon. The tie in novel is canon with Cassandra as the main protagonist.
I think that ubisoft should include, at some point, a mode wherein we follow the footsteps of Cassandra and they remove the dialogue options. By forcing us down a more linear path we, as fans, can experience the canon version of the game.

I was wondering about everyone's thoughts on this as I haven't seen this idea out there. I apologise if someone already has and if so can someone post up a link please ��

I agree, a canon path would be nice. Put a little asterisk next to the canon dialogue choices. Might be too much work though at this point.

MnemonicSyntax
07-08-2018, 08:55 PM
I'm down for this.

Alcachazz
07-09-2018, 10:28 AM
Ye I agree. It is unlikely but maybe later down the road as a free dlc it would be great.

ProdiGurl
07-09-2018, 10:58 AM
I think at this point nobody cares about canon or lore anymore (except for a few loyal fans).
It has nothing to do with "loyalty", it has more to do with preferences and what make the game important or satisfying to individual players. They differ.
I'm a loyal fan since ACII & preorder the games but never cared much for the whole Desmond aspect for whatever reason.. I only thought it was important to the game so you knew you were going back in time thru the Animus, but that was it.
As far as loyal fans go, I'm not sure what it is from some of the nonstop B******g & rudeness I see. There's constructive critique & then there's chronic attack where sometimes you really have to wonder why people endure something just becuz of a few games from the distant past. Whatever.

I think the Asterisk is a good idea though.

veloSylraptor
07-09-2018, 02:33 PM
I agree, a canon path would be nice. Put a little asterisk next to the canon dialogue choices. Might be too much work though at this point.

A better implementation would be a setting in the option menu you can activate, making the game automatically choose the options. An asterisk or any indication during the dialogue choices is just openly hostile to the audience Ubisoft is targeting with the new direction, and also runs counter to their intentions.

joelsantos24
07-09-2018, 03:32 PM
A better implementation would be a setting in the option menu you can activate, making the game automatically choose the options. An asterisk or any indication during the dialogue choices is just openly hostile to the audience Ubisoft is targeting with the new direction, and also runs counter to their intentions.
I might be mistaken, but Ubisoft isn't well known for providing different options to players. Especially, if those options defeat the very purpose of the changes that they've put into effect. Their intention was to make the players follow their own distinct narrative path, which fundamentally destroys the very premise around which the series was built. If you have a game mode that automatically offers you the canonical experience, it contradicts that purpose.

I honestly don't believe Ubisoft would ever do this. I agree it's a good idea and it'd work well, but I just can't see Ubisoft going with it. I know Monolith, for example, is currently re-working the entire last chapter of Shadow of War, the infamous Shadow Wars. Given the overwhelming, endless grind that it forces players into, many fans simply left or sold the game. Now, they're admittedly going to offer a completely different narrative structure for that last chapter of the game. This kind of approach would never occur with Ubisoft. They'll give you what they planned and that's it.

veloSylraptor
07-09-2018, 03:49 PM
I might be mistaken, but Ubisoft isn't well known for providing different options to players. Especially, if those options defeat the very purpose of the changes that they've put into effect. Their intention was to make the players follow their own distinct narrative path, which fundamentally destroys the very premise around which the series was built. If you have a game mode that automatically offers you the canonical experience, it contradicts that purpose.

I honestly don't believe Ubisoft would ever do this. I agree it's a good idea and it'd work well, but I just can't see Ubisoft going with it. I know Monolith, for example, is currently re-working the entire last chapter of Shadow of War, the infamous Shadow Wars. Given the overwhelming, endless grind that it forces players into, many fans simply left or sold the game. Now, they're admittedly going to offer a completely different narrative structure for that last chapter of the game. This kind of approach would never occur with Ubisoft. They'll give you what they planned and that's it.

To clarify, I'm not arguing for this to be included. I like the new rpg direction just fine, in fact I'm one of the new people they drew in with the new design.

I'm just saying to the people who would like that option (as quoted in my earlier post), that an option in the menu would be better simply because it serves their preference without being hostile to players who actually like to forge their own story, as an asterisk in the dialogue menu staring at you would.

AnimusLover
07-09-2018, 04:15 PM
People, including myself, are not necessary comfortable with the idea that ac odyssey isn't canon. The tie in novel is canon with Cassandra as the main protagonist.
I think that ubisoft should include, at some point, a mode wherein we follow the footsteps of Cassandra and they remove the dialogue options. By forcing us down a more linear path we, as fans, can experience the canon version of the game.

I was wondering about everyone's thoughts on this as I haven't seen this idea out there. I apologise if someone already has and if so can someone post up a link please ��

That's a good idea. I like the idea of a canon mode where dialogue options are completely removed, Alexios is removed and it's just the canon story with Kassandra.
What I don't want, which some have suggested, is to have all those dialogue options there and then a little marker indicating the canon choices. That would ruin the game for me.

AnimusLover
07-09-2018, 04:21 PM
I agree, a canon path would be nice. Put a little asterisk next to the canon dialogue choices. Might be too much work though at this point.

No, that's exactly what Ubisoft should NOT do.
What the OP has suggested is to have a completely separate mode where you can't even see the other choices i.e. the only dialogue available is the canon choice.
I would be fine with this but I would not want to see all the choices and then have the canon choice marked with an asterick for the sheer fact that it's inevitable that I won't necessarily agree with Kassandra's canon choices so it will just make me feel like I'm playing the game "wrong".

joelsantos24
07-09-2018, 06:36 PM
Whatever it is, asterisks or separate canonical modes, I don't think it matters because it's unlikely for Ubisoft to apply any concept that may hinter their initial design. But I hope they do.

I just find it funny, though, for people to speak about options, choices and then ask for canonical modes, as if it all made sense in the same spectrum. I mean, some don't want to see the (hypothetical) asterisk, telling you the real option, because it reminds you that you may be choosing a lie, after all? However, deep down, we all know, even if the game presents us with choices, there aren't any. Not really. One path is real. One choice is true. All the rest are lies. So, some people want the canonical experience, some want choices, while others want everything? But regardless of all, they just don't want to know which choice is what? So, ignorance is bliss?

I find it all very confusing.

https://media.giphy.com/media/gKsJUddjnpPG0/giphy.gif

Alcachazz
07-09-2018, 09:25 PM
Ignorance would be bliss for me if I didn't know that there is going to be a book detailing the true story. I wish I could just play odyssey like any other rpg. I immediately don't care about playing as Alexios straight off the bat because I know the guys character doesn't actually exist in this fictional universe (ironic that he is in most of the promotional footage btw). It sounds silly and it's hard to explain but it won't feel right playing as a non-canon character.
The reality is its probably going to end a bit like ac unity where the historical aspect of the game is pointless. I'm hoping for good first civ stuff and good modern day.

joelsantos24
07-09-2018, 09:56 PM
Ignorance would be bliss for me if I didn't know that there is going to be a book detailing the true story. I wish I could just play odyssey like any other rpg. I immediately don't care about playing as Alexios straight off the bat because I know the guys character doesn't actually exist in this fictional universe (ironic that he is in most of the promotional footage btw). It sounds silly and it's hard to explain but it won't feel right playing as a non-canon character.
The reality is its probably going to end a bit like ac unity where the historical aspect of the game is pointless. I'm hoping for good first civ stuff and good modern day.
That's not really silly or nonsensical, because the mythology and it's canonical structure matter. People realise it's stupid, to have a very distinct canonical path and still offer options to the players. That's nothing more than a forced design, made by a company that is only interested in capitalising their games, regardless of the fans and the features or limitations of the series.

quanzaizai
07-09-2018, 10:47 PM
maybe somhow alexios is canon too ? :confused: :)

AnimusLover
07-10-2018, 03:44 AM
Whatever it is, asterisks or separate canonical modes, I don't think it matters because it's unlikely for Ubisoft to apply any concept that may hinter their initial design. But I hope they do.

I just find it funny, though, for people to speak about options, choices and then ask for canonical modes, as if it all made sense in the same spectrum. I mean, some don't want to see the (hypothetical) asterisk, telling you the real option, because it reminds you that you may be choosing a lie, after all? However, deep down, we all know, even if the game presents us with choices, there aren't any. Not really. One path is real. One choice is true. All the rest are lies. So, some people want the canonical experience, some want choices, while others want everything? But regardless of all, they just don't want to know which choice is what? So, ignorance is bliss?

I find it all very confusing.

https://media.giphy.com/media/gKsJUddjnpPG0/giphy.gif


You said it yourself: ignorance is bliss. For one, I don't invest in AC in other media so as far as I'm concerned if it's not in the game then it's not concrete so what happens in the novel means nothing to me. I'd be quite happy playing my Odyssey in the first playthrough out of curiosity, then on my second playthrough do the canon story line. However, having the game tell you what is the "right" choice i.e. canon choice as it's giving you all these options defeats the point, and I can guarantee that many will players not resist the temptation to go off canon to get what they think is a more desirable outcome. At least with a canon mode both sides get to be happy.

I have a strong feeling Ubisoft will be monitoring the choices people make very, very closely in order to inform future story lines.

joelsantos24
07-10-2018, 09:43 AM
You said it yourself: ignorance is bliss. For one, I don't invest in AC in other media so as far as I'm concerned if it's not in the game then it's not concrete so what happens in the novel means nothing to me. I'd be quite happy playing my Odyssey in the first playthrough out of curiosity, then on my second playthrough do the canon story line. However, having the game tell you what is the "right" choice i.e. canon choice as it's giving you all these options defeats the point, and I can guarantee that many will players not resist the temptation to go off canon to get what they think is a more desirable outcome. At least with a canon mode both sides get to be happy.

I have a strong feeling Ubisoft will be monitoring the choices people make very, very closely in order to inform future story lines.
It doesn't really matter, whether or not you invest yourself in different AC media. On one side, you have the canonical structure of the story, and on the other, you have a lie.

Up until now, you didn't really have to read the books, in order to have a clear perspective about what unfolds, because the games were canonical. The games were enough, essentially. The books presented the complete perspective of the storyline, and they were interesting nonetheless, because, for obvious limitations, the games can't contain the complete record of the story. So, for example, if you're wondering why exactly Alta´r and Abbas couldn't stare at each other without foaming from the mouth, you can read The Secret Crusade and learn about it. With Odyssey, on the other hand, the game can portray a completely different recollection of events, in analogy with what really occurred.

My question is, is it enough to get defensive and adopt an "absorbed" view of the matter, saying that "whatever I choose, happened"? You said it yourself, you want to play the canonical structure of the story. You want to know what truly happened. Why? Because the canonical perspective is all that matters, really. Choices and options can't exist in the AC universe. You're solely replaying memories of ancestors, nothing more. And like I said before, this is merely a design forced upon the game, in order to attract new audiences. With this approach from Ubisoft, the flood gates are opened, and who knows what's coming next? Zombies? Battle royale?

cawatrooper9
07-10-2018, 02:51 PM
maybe somhow alexios is canon too ? :confused: :)

Yeah, did I miss something?

Why are we just assuming that the novel is somehow pivotal to the game's story, just because it's cemented in canon?

Generally, the novels haven't been retellings of the main story lately. Desert Oath was a prequel, for instance.

Isn't it possible that the book tells a story of an adventure with Kassandra, and the game picks up afterward with either of the characters?

Granted, that still doesn't really solve the "multiple protagonists" issue some people have, but I also don't think we can absolutely say that Kassandra is the canon protagonist of the game just because she's in a book that is likely about a different plot entirely.

dxsxhxcx
07-10-2018, 03:42 PM
Yeah, did I miss something?

Why are we just assuming that the novel is somehow pivotal to the game's story, just because it's cemented in canon?

Generally, the novels haven't been retellings of the main story lately. Desert Oath was a prequel, for instance.

Isn't it possible that the book tells a story of an adventure with Kassandra, and the game picks up afterward with either of the characters?

Granted, that still doesn't really solve the "multiple protagonists" issue some people have, but I also don't think we can absolutely say that Kassandra is the canon protagonist of the game just because she's in a book that is likely about a different plot entirely.

The problem with dialogue options is that the character's personality isn't something set in stone since our choices will shape the character's personality, what if the book shows a Cassandra whose personality is totally different from the one we decide to be in the game? Yes, people change, but when given reason to, it'll certainly bother some people not knowing or having to pretend something happened along the way because the player decided to roleplay as a jerk in the game and the Cassandra from the book ends up being a good girl 101.

They could sell the book as a "what if" scenario, but if it isn't canon then what's the point of making it in the first place?

cawatrooper9
07-10-2018, 03:44 PM
The problem with dialogue options is that the character's personality isn't something set in stone since our choices will shape the character's personality, what if the book shows a Cassandra whose personality is totally different from the one we decide to be in the game?

That could possibly be an obstacle. If the book gave her a more neutral alignment, it might help, but I could see how even that could make some of the more polarizing choices seem out of character.

AnimusLover
07-10-2018, 04:09 PM
It doesn't really matter, whether or not you invest yourself in different AC media. On one side, you have the canonical structure of the story, and on the other, you have a lie.

Yes, but the player won't know what is the lie without the astericks - for all we know, we could end up making all the choices that happen to be canon...
In a lot of RPGs, even the Witcher 3, there is clearly a good outcome and a bad outcome. Imagine if the "good" decision was marked with an asterick. What would be the point? There is no mystery, no reason to work out what to do. Yes, in the back of our minds we know there's a right approach but working out what that is is what makes it fun. You can't do that if the game outright tells you. There will be decisions where inevitably the player will not agree with the canonical choice but will feel compelled to either pick it and feel bad afterwards... That would be a terrible way to play a game like this.


My question is, is it enough to get defensive and adopt an view of the matter, saying that "whatever I choose, happened"?

Firstly, you need to take care with your language - you don't use 'autistic' in such a flippant way, it's disrespectful to people who suffer from autism. Secondly, with all due respect, I think it's rather you who is being defensive about this, Joel, and this is coming from someone who agrees with you that dialogue choices should not be present in an Assassin's Creed game. I don't see why it bothers you so much for the player to at least have the option of switching between canon mode and choice mode. If you can have it so that it satisfies both sides of the fanbase then why not? It's like it's not enough for you alone to have the canon mode, you have to force others to experience what you want as well which isn't exactly fair... You said it yourself: any choice other than canon is a lie so you should be comfortable in the knowledge that you are playing the game the "right" way. You don't need to worry about how others are playing it...


You said it yourself, you want to play the canonical structure of the story. You want to know what truly happened. Why? Because the canonical perspective is all that matters, really.

No. I want to play the canonical version because I want to follow the story through line without complications in future instalments. The story hasn't "mattered" for a long time now and I think it's time for us lore lovers to just accept it and allow Ubisoft to make the game they want to make. I gave up on the story of Assassin's Creed after Origins - a game that failed to do the only job it had to do. I will always have the Ezio trilogy and AC1 to hold on to.

The way I see it, as a fan you have 3 choices:

1. complain incessantly while Ubisoft continues to ignore you.
2. stop playing the games.
3. Accept the games for what they are rather than holding on to what they're not anymore.

I have chosen option 3. Is that the canon choice? I don't know because thankfully there isn't an asterick telling me if it's the right approach or not...

I broke up with Assassin's Creed after Origins and now it's just casual sex lol. I don't expect the level of greatness they once had. If I want truly great games with good story telling I will now play The Witcher , Fallout or Uncharted. I don't need Assassin's Creed anymore.


ith this approach from Ubisoft, the flood gates are opened, and who knows what's coming next? Zombies? Battle royale?

Don't give them any ideas.

joelsantos24
07-10-2018, 04:50 PM
Yes, but the player won't know what is the lie without the astericks - for all we know, we could end up making all the choices that happen to be canon...
In a lot of RPGs, even the Witcher 3, there is clearly a good outcome and a bad outcome. Imagine if the "good" decision was marked with an asterick. What would be the point? There is no mystery, no reason to work out what to do. Yes, in the back of our minds we know there's a right approach but working out what that is is what makes it fun. You can't do that if the game outright tells you. There will be decisions where inevitably the player will not agree with the canonical choice but will feel compelled to either pick it and feel bad afterwards... That would be a terrible way to play a game like this.
As you wish. In my case, for instance, it's enough to perceive that there're a canonical path and a lie to choose from, to throw me off-track regarding the topic. It's not a matter of ignorance being bliss, because we're not fully ignorant on the subject. We know that one choice is right and the rest are lies. We may only be uncertain on which is what. Subsequently, it becomes an issue of whether or not that level of knowledge is enough to satisfy or alienate the players.


Firstly, you need to take care with your language - you don't use 'autistic' in such a flippant way, it's disrespectful to people who suffer from autism. Secondly, with all due respect, I think it's rather you who is being defensive about this, Joel, and this is coming from someone who agrees with you that dialogue choices should not be present in an Assassin's Creed game. I don't see why it bothers you so much for the player to at least have the option of switching between canon mode and choice mode. If you can have it so that it satisfies both sides of the fanbase then why not? It's like it's not enough for you alone to have the canon mode, you have to force others to experience what you want as well which isn't exactly fair... You said it yourself: any choice other than canon is a lie so you should be comfortable in the knowledge that you are playing the game the "right" way. You don't need to worry about how others are playing it...
I meant no disrespect.

If you prefer, we can talk of self-absorption. I believe that's a more appropriate reference. You play the game your own way, you don't care about other AC media, you don't care about what is canonical or what isn't, because you consider whatever you do in the game to be strictly canonical. Is that enough, though? Especially, when Ubisoft took the care to underline the fact that there is a canonical path?


No. I want to play the canonical version because I want to follow the story through line without complications in future instalments. The story hasn't "mattered" for a long time now and I think it's time for us lore lovers to just accept it and allow Ubisoft to make the game they want to make. I gave up on the story of Assassin's Creed after Origins - a game that failed to do the only job it had to do. I will always have the Ezio trilogy and AC1 to hold on to.

The way I see it, as a fan you have 3 choices:

1. complain incessantly while Ubisoft continues to ignore you.
2. stop playing the games.
3. Accept the games for what they are rather than holding on to what they're not anymore.

I have chosen option 3. Is that the canon choice? I don't know because thankfully there isn't an asterick telling me if it's the right approach or not...

I broke up with Assassin's Creed after Origins and now it's just casual sex lol. I don't expect the level of greatness they once had. If I want truly great games with good story telling I will now play The Witcher , Fallout or Uncharted. I don't need Assassin's Creed anymore.
You know? I did enjoy the story, up until Origins. It's obviously not at the level of the great stories created by other studios, and explored in other games, such as The Last of Us, Uncharted, God of War, The Order, Tomb Raider, etc. Nonetheless, I enjoyed the Assassins vs. Templars conflict and the repercussions it had on the characters throughout time.

Holding on to this series and Ubisoft's general approaches is less and less likely. I'm afraid. I think that ship has sailed... They managed to give me what I've always wanted from AC, a game set in Ancient Egypt, so I'll hold on to that, for now. Odyssey is completely and utterly out of the question, though. We'll see what they release after this one.

AnimusLover
07-10-2018, 11:30 PM
As you wish. In my case, for instance, it's enough to perceive that there're a canonical path and a lie to choose from, to throw me off-track regarding the topic. It's not a matter of ignorance being bliss, because we're not fully ignorant on the subject. We know that one choice is right and the rest are lies. We may only be uncertain on which is what. Subsequently, it becomes an issue of whether or not that level of knowledge is enough to satisfy or alienate the players.

Exactly.


I meant no disrespect.

If you prefer, we can talk of self-absorption. I believe that's a more appropriate reference. You play the game your own way, you don't care about other AC media, you don't care about what is canonical or what isn't, because you consider whatever you do in the game to be strictly canonical. Is that enough, though? Especially, when Ubisoft took the care to underline the fact that there is a canonical path?

1. I dont think passive aggressively accusing people of being self-absorbed because they don't see things your way is a smart idea. Your points lose merit when you can't make them without insulting somebody.

2. You're putting words into my mouth. I never said I don't care about what is canonical. I've said about 3 times now that I don't want the astericks next to the canon dialogue choices because if it's there I'm just going to pick them and feel annoyed about it afterwards should it conflict with what I want. That, in itself, shows I value canon above all, enough to choose it against my own instincts. And if you've read any of my previous posts you would know I am not a fan of "the way the player does it is how the ancestor did it" approach. I like the idea that players all have that shared animus experience as it cements the idea that we are playing a memory (and not simulation) which is why I want a canon mode in the first place. No, I don't care about other medias because Ubisoft themselves have said they're only canon until something in the game contradicts it. The game is the base medium, the source on which everything is built on. Remember that.
If you care about other media then congratulations: Ubisoft has successfully manipulated you... because the novels, comics, movies etc is just a way for them to throw the lore lovers a bone whilst continously ignoring their requests to put it in the game, and on top of that make additional money off transmedia purchases. Yay?

Alcachazz
07-11-2018, 07:15 AM
The way I see it, as a fan you have 3 choices:

1. complain incessantly while Ubisoft continues to ignore you.
2. stop playing the games.
3. Accept the games for what they are rather than holding on to what they're not anymore.


I agree with this. I am still going to enjoy the game one way or another. It just would be nice to add this other mode for those who are interested in the story as well. I don't think it would be too hard as Ubisoft made the discovery tour without combat. It would still contain all the gameplay just without the dialogue choices and just with Cassandra.

joelsantos24
07-11-2018, 09:36 AM
1. I dont think passive aggressively accusing people of being self-absorbed because they don't see things your way is a smart idea. Your points lose merit when you can't make them without insulting somebody.
I meant no disrespect. I didn't insult anyone. I'm sorry if you felt triggered or insulted by something.

Saying "whatever I choose to do in the game, happened", is what being self-absorbed means, by definition. That's not being judgemental. I didn't mean it positively or negatively, it merely served to describe a posture or a stance on a topic. Moreover, I didn't classify others as "self-absorbed because they don't see things my way", That's totally beside the point. The self-absorption remark comes from the fact that many players are willingly choosing to ignore the canonical structure of the game (as is their right an their prerogative), and define their own choices and experiences as the true canonical path, in their eyes. That's neither good or bad. It is what it is.

You seem to want to make this all about conflict, but I'm not looking for any fights or arguments. It's not about you against me, or your views against mine. It certainly isn't about my way against your's. You want to make this about (pseudo)insults, even when I haven't insulted anyone. I think we've misinterpreted ourselves in insurmountable ways, so I believe it's best to finish this discussion from my part.

veloSylraptor
07-11-2018, 11:55 AM
I meant no disrespect. I didn't insult anyone. I'm sorry if you felt triggered or insulted by something.

Saying "whatever I choose to do in the game, happened", is what being self-absorbed means, by definition. That's not being judgemental. I didn't mean it positively or negatively, it merely served to describe a posture or a stance on a topic. Moreover, I didn't classify others as "self-absorbed because they don't see things my way", That's totally beside the point. The self-absorption remark comes from the fact that many players are willingly choosing to ignore the canonical structure of the game (as is their right an their prerogative), and define their own choices and experiences as the true canonical path, in their eyes. That's neither good or bad. It is what it is.

You seem to want to make this all about conflict, but I'm not looking for any fights or arguments. It's not about you against me, or your views against mine. It certainly isn't about my way against your's. You want to make this about (pseudo)insults, even when I haven't insulted anyone. I think we've misinterpreted ourselves in insurmountable ways, so I believe it's best to finish this discussion from my part.

Except they have explicitly been granted license by Ubisoft to ignore the canonical structure and say, "Whatever I choose to do in the game happened."

You can look up the recent Reddit AMA by Jonathan Dumont:

https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/8suomv/hi_im_jonathan_dumont_creative_director_of/e12f9f8

"Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path , there is no right or wrong way."

So players doing what you say are in fact, playing the correct way as officially endorsed by a representative of Ubisoft. As the owner of the Assassin's Creed intellectual property, they have explicitly allowed players to consider their playthrough canonical for them if they so choose. You could disagree with Ubisoft and try to argue it doesn't make logical sense to have multiple canons for different people, but you would lack the legal standing to make that argument. Ubisoft owns the Assassin's Creed IP, they have the right to declare what is or isn't canonical.

joelsantos24
07-11-2018, 12:57 PM
Except they have explicitly been granted license by Ubisoft to ignore the canonical structure and say, "Whatever I choose to do in the game happened."

You can look up the recent Reddit AMA by Jonathan Dumont:

https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/8suomv/hi_im_jonathan_dumont_creative_director_of/e12f9f8

"Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path , there is no right or wrong way."

So players doing what you say are in fact, playing the correct way as officially endorsed by a representative of Ubisoft. As the owner of the Assassin's Creed intellectual property, they have explicitly allowed players to consider their playthrough canonical for them if they so choose. You could disagree with Ubisoft and try to argue it doesn't make logical sense to have multiple canons for different people, but you would lack the legal standing to make that argument. Ubisoft owns the Assassin's Creed IP, they have the right to declare what is or isn't canonical.
Exactly. But I also said it isn't good or bad, for people to play their own way and consider their own personal experience a canonical perspective. I can't take sides in that regard, since each experience is personal to every player, and it's their own prerogative to define it the way they see fit.

I do have an opinion, however, on choices, optional paths and multiple endings in the series. Since you're replaying memories, and therefore, merely watching what your ancestors did or experienced, there's literally no margin and no place for variability.

Regarding what you said on Ubisoft's official stance on the matter, I obviously disagree. Rationally and logically, from the moment they define a specific path as canonical, there's nothing more to discuss. Ubisoft does own their IP and they already defined and declared what is canonical. The additional remark about there not being a right or wrong path, is their way to legitimise or justify their design, and in general, the existence of variability in a memory. I don't think it's necessary to discuss the concept of canon, but it's basically a recollection of truths that are considered factual, absolutely untouchable, irrefutable and irreproachable. If a player goes against what is determined as the canonical path, then that path is untrue and wrong. So, saying there's no right or wrong, after effectively declaring a canon, is nonsensical.

With that being said, the design was applied in Odyssey, nonetheless, and players will be able to, indeed, choose their paths according to their desires. Despite what each one of us might think about it, that's going to be part of the game, so, including a canonical mode would definitely satisfy both sides. There are many fans alienated by these decisions and starting to distance themselves from the series, so I believe this would diminish the effects of that discontent.

AnimusLover
07-11-2018, 02:43 PM
I meant no disrespect. I didn't insult anyone. I'm sorry if you felt triggered or insulted by something.

Saying "whatever I choose to do in the game, happened", is what being self-absorbed means, by definition. That's not being judgemental. I didn't mean it positively or negatively, it merely served to describe a posture or a stance on a topic. Moreover, I didn't classify others as "self-absorbed because they don't see things my way", That's totally beside the point. The self-absorption remark comes from the fact that many players are willingly choosing to ignore the canonical structure of the game (as is their right an their prerogative), and define their own choices and experiences as the true canonical path, in their eyes. That's neither good or bad. It is what it is.

You seem to want to make this all about conflict, but I'm not looking for any fights or arguments. It's not about you against me, or your views against mine. It certainly isn't about my way against your's. You want to make this about (pseudo)insults, even when I haven't insulted anyone. I think we've misinterpreted ourselves in insurmountable ways, so I believe it's best to finish this discussion from my part.

Joel, give it up, you're not fooling anyone lol. I think it's fairly obvious you're taking jabs at anyone who doesn't agree with you and then pretending you weren't when called out on it.
It's rather you who is making it personal with all the insults at other players just because you're upset that Ubisoft hasn't designed the game the way you want it to be designed and you're coming across as petty. Unfortunately for you I'm not "triggered", I actually find it amusing how it bothers you so much that there would still be the option for other players to play the game the way the devs designed it despite there being a canon mode, and yet you talk about "self absorption" lol. I look forward to your reeaction when all those multiple endings are posted on YouTube, hopefully you won't have a fit. :D

joelsantos24
07-12-2018, 09:59 AM
Joel, give it up, you're not fooling anyone lol. I think it's fairly obvious you're taking jabs at anyone who doesn't agree with you and then pretending you weren't when called out on it.
It's rather you who is making it personal with all the insults at other players just because you're upset that Ubisoft hasn't designed the game the way you want it to be designed and you're coming across as petty. Unfortunately for you I'm not "triggered", I actually find it amusing how it bothers you so much that there would still be the option for other players to play the game the way the devs designed it despite there being a canon mode, and yet you talk about "self absorption" lol. I look forward to your reeaction when all those multiple endings are posted on YouTube, hopefully you won't have a fit. :D
Fooling? LOOOOOOOL.

I haven't taken any jabs, as you call it, at anyone. As a matter of fact, until you arrived, things were fairly calm. Ironic, won't you say? You were the one clearly and blatantly triggered by something, apparently the "autism" term. But as I pointed out countless times, this reference was merely directed at the posture that many players are adopting, saying that "whatever they'll end up doing/choosing in the game, will happen and be canonical". Even then, I remember I was merely being inquisitive about it (on post #18), namely asking if it was enough to have that mindset, when Ubisoft took the time to declare a very specific canonical path. That is to say, if there are choices, options and multiple endings, why is there a canonical path in the first place? You were the one who distorted my words and intentions, in order to proclaim that I was being disrespectful. No one else took a problem with it, maybe because they could see the true meaning of the term, without implying or assuming anything.

Furthermore, where are "all the insults at other players"? Show me. Where is that barrage of insults? Why haven't the community managers banned me? Please, don't tell me that it's the self-absorption reference again, the one you continuously distort, misinterpret and misunderstand? Well, I think it's important to underline, once more, that, until you arrived, all was well. Until you alone flipped out with the "autism" reference, all was calm.

cawatrooper9
07-12-2018, 02:27 PM
In fact, I'm going to require that both of you either discuss the topic without the personal attacks, or just drop it entirely.

AnimusLover
07-12-2018, 07:20 PM
Fooling? LOOOOOOOL.

I haven't taken any jabs, as you call it, at anyone. As a matter of fact, until you arrived, things were fairly calm. Ironic, won't you say? You were the one clearly and blatantly triggered by something, apparently the "autism" term. But as I pointed out countless times, this reference was merely directed at the posture that many players are adopting, saying that "whatever they'll end up doing/choosing in the game, will happen and be canonical". Even then, I remember I was merely being inquisitive about it (on post #18), namely asking if it was enough to have that mindset, when Ubisoft took the time to declare a very specific canonical path. That is to say, if there are choices, options and multiple endings, why is there a canonical path in the first place? You were the one who distorted my words and intentions, in order to proclaim that I was being disrespectful. No one else took a problem with it, maybe because they could see the true meaning of the term, without implying or assuming anything.

Furthermore, where are "all the insults at other players"? Show me. Where is that barrage of insults? Why haven't the community managers banned me? Please, don't tell me that it's the self-absorption reference again, the one you continuously distort, misinterpret and misunderstand? Well, I think it's important to underline, once more, that, until you arrived, all was well. Until you alone flipped out with the "autism" reference, all was calm.

No, until you insulted people who suffer from autism by using the term in an inappropriate manner all was calm...

Anyway, Joel, with this post you've lost all credibility and any respect from me and you're coming across as just sad now lol.
I'm putting you on ignore - you can carry on throwing tantrums and screaming into the abyss while Ubisoft (and I) ignore you...