PDA

View Full Version : ACU - the French King Louis XVI was NOT corrupt



ubiuni
06-12-2014, 08:41 PM
Hello Ubisoft,
hello guys,

first, ACU is absolutely stunning and I cannot wait to paly it especially because the French Revolution is one of my favourite historic periods.
I went to a French school and as I started researching outside class about the French Revolution, I found out that things weren't as black and white as they were described in any school book.

Regarding the King Louis XVI and Queen Marie-Antoinette, I am sure you have done your homework for ACU :)
In short, these two didn't want to rule, and they certainly did not know how to, and they were surrounded by people who took advantage of them, corrupt people, but I would not call the King "headstrong", even less "corrupt" as shown at the beginning of one of the gameplay trailers (http://youtu.be/s3USVnzXZPo).

I am sure you have a great story line in mind too for ACU -I really cannot wait to see the final game.
You'll forgive me for posting this, but I hope your story shows some nuances to the French Revolution that are commonly not very well known :)

Take care!

pacmanate
06-12-2014, 08:49 PM
Im sure they have done their research, they always do!

Who is writing this game anyway? Does anyone know?

Shahkulu101
06-12-2014, 08:53 PM
Im sure they have done their research, they always do!

Who is writing this game anyway? Does anyone know?

A bloke named Travis Stout, relatively unknown. He worked on Fallout: New Vegas as one of the writers but nobody knows how significant his contributions were.

ze_topazio
06-12-2014, 08:59 PM
He was naive and incompetent, a poor man that paid for the accumulated mistakes of his predecessors.

king-hailz
06-12-2014, 09:02 PM
Well as Amancio said people still argue about what happened today, i personally dont think they king was that corrupt but more the people behind the scenes who i thought would be the templars. Also remember Assassin's Creed always had you fighting against the different sides... but i personally think it was totally unfair what happenes to Queen Antoinette, i mean she didnt really have a reason to be killed so they blamed her for molesting her son, then they took her away and killed her... her children then died because of neglect!

guardian_titan
06-12-2014, 09:03 PM
Given subtleties of other historical figures that were left out (Charles Lee having a Mohawk wife/twins as well as relatives who were with him during the French-Indian War and his dogs, Benjamin Tallmadge was in the military during the American Revolution but looks to be a civilian in AC3, Native American treatment is largely swept under the rug, Anne Bonny having a husband who's never really mentioned in AC4, etc), I wouldn't hold my breath.

If Louis XVI has a large part in the game, he has a better chance of being shown as a pawn than being just some random corrupt noble. If he plays a small part ... then chances are he'll just be relegated to the more historically inaccurate version most people know. I don't suspect he'll have much of a role since he was beheaded in 1793. Same with Marie Antoinette. Granted, possible you start off knowing Louis and Marie Antoinette since Arno is supposed to be a noble himself and once they're out of the picture, Napoleon takes their place. Lafayette likely also have a small part since he was around for a while until his exile.

But given trends with past games .... I wouldn't count on it too much. If they're not the main character, their stories end up rather mundane. Could be surprised, but I'm not betting on it. Easier to set the bar low and be surprised when the game's released than set it too high and be disappointed.

DumbGamerTag94
06-12-2014, 09:09 PM
You said it yourself. He was surrounded by people who manipulated him and they were corrupt. And these people influenced him. Well being manipulated by bad influences is pretty much the definition of corruption. He was corrupted by the people around him. And took their side. So therefore he was corrupt.

Corruption is not to be confused with someone's goodness/badness or personality. By all accounts Louis was a nice man and had the best of intentions. But he was still corrupted by those around him. And allowed for their corrupt ways to continue during his reign. So he was a corrupt man. But likely a good man.

You can be corrupt even of you aren't intentionally doing wrong. He was guilty by association. And he allowed the nobles excesses and abuses of power to continue even when France was in economic crisis and a time of need. Influenced by others or not he was in a position to stop it but did not. That is corruption. He catered to the needs of the people who influenced him not the betterment of France.

To say he's not guilty is like saying you aren't responsible for a murder. When you were there the whole time and saw the guy break in. But didn't call the police. Doing nothing makes you just as responsible

dxsxhxcx
06-12-2014, 09:11 PM
A bloke named Travis Stout, relatively unknown. He worked on Fallout: New Vegas as one of the writers but nobody knows how significant his contributions were.

http://drinkingcoffeecola.blogspot.nl/2012/10/profile-on-games-writer-travis-stout.html

ubiuni
06-12-2014, 09:13 PM
I disagree - there is a difference between being corrupt (thus knowing what is going on) and being taken advantage of (having no idea of the hidden agendas of others). Louis XVI was taken advantage of... he certainly had difficult choices to make, but corrupt means purposly doing the wrong thing for personal reasons.

DumbGamerTag94
06-12-2014, 09:39 PM
Corrupt doesn't mean you have to be aware. It literally means tainted or debased of character/perverted. Louis allowed those people to corrupt him. Not that he was literally corrupt himself. But he WAS corrupted by others. And his position of power and ability to stop it makes him no less guilty. He is just as bad no matter how good he is or how well intentioned.

What u are using is called the Nuremberg defense. It's what the Nazis used after WW2 to spare the hangmans noose. They claimed that they were only following orders. That they couldn't put a stop to murdering millions of people. But yet they partook in it. So they were still found guilty for allowing it to perpetuate. A train conductor that hauls cargo to Auschwitz is just as guilty as the man who ordered it or influenced him. If he knew it was wrong he should have stood up. Well that defense doesn't work. And they were found guilty and executed.

Same goes for Louis. Unintentionally allowin thousands of French people to starve because your advisors told you to is no different from a Nazi that murders millions against their will because they were ordered to. Even worse for Louis he wasn't bound by orders. He had the power to stop it and didn't.

That's corruption. And to allow people that blatently corrupted to influence you is either corruption on Louis part or shear incompetence. And deserved execution on that allone. Also the excesses in which he and his wife partook during such terrible times in his country(all funded by tax). Is treasonous and corrupt by any standard

LoyalACFan
06-12-2014, 09:40 PM
Uh... does it matter if the real-life guy was corrupt or not? I'm pretty sure like half the people we've assassinated in AC weren't corrupt in real life. Louis XVI could have been a Templar in AC canon, or at least a puppet of theirs. The "corrupt" part could signify his secret obedience the Templars, and the "headstrong" part could refer to him not following their instructions and getting himself killed, upsetting the Templar's balance of power.


Same goes for Louis. Unintentionally allowin thousands of French people to starve because your advisors told you to is no different from a Nazi that murders millions against their will because they were ordered to. Even worse for Louis he wasn't bound by orders. He had the power to stop it and didn't.

That's corruption. And to allow people that blatently corrupted to influence you is either corruption on Louis part or shear incompetence. And deserved execution on that allone. Also the excesses in which he and his wife partook during such terrible times in his country(all funded by tax). Is treasonous and corrupt by any standard

Eh, I think that's a bit too simplistic, I'm not overly familiar with the French Revolution but from what I've read, Louis was so out of touch with reality that he didn't even know how bad things were in his kingdom. He was constantly surrounded by people who kept him extremely sheltered since the day he was born.

Megas_Doux
06-12-2014, 09:50 PM
I dont see the Louis XVI as a templar!

1 Because templars tend to dislike the monarchy, at least the ones seeing in AC III and AC IV.
2 Based on the little speech from Arno at the beginning of the SP demo "A king ruled, murdered as men just as vile, a 1000 terrors I mean to cure, templar by templar"

A mere speculation, of course.

DumbGamerTag94
06-12-2014, 09:54 PM
Eh, I think that's a bit too simplistic, I'm not overly familiar with the French Revolution but from what I've read, Louis was so out of touch with reality that he didn't even know how bad things were in his kingdom. He was constantly surrounded by people who kept him extremely sheltered since the day he was born.

Exactly. And where does his power and wealth come from? Tax. He lives in Versailles. His wife was notorious for her extravagances. They threw parties and hired gardeners and maids. And at more than one palace. All the while at that time France was in a financial depression akin to the 1930s. The people could barely afford to eat. Yet taxes were maintained so nobles could live like gods and eat banquets for every meal. While the average person had difficulty getting Bread(which is why is such a serious crime in Les Miserables. People laugh about that plot point but it's very serious in historic context).

And I understand he was isolated as a kid. But when people literally riot outside hot home. You can't tell me he wasn't aware of what was going on and what had to be done.

If he and his ilk had only cut back on excess they would have helped the people and prevented revolution. But they all ended up dead. Consumed by their own greed and corruption and reaped what they had sewn

LoyalACFan
06-12-2014, 10:03 PM
And I understand he was isolated as a kid. But when people literally riot outside hot home. You can't tell me he wasn't aware of what was going on and what had to be done.

I don't know, man, when you've lived your entire life being told every day since birth that you're practically God, that really does a number on your head. I'm not sure whether he ever really grasped the connection between his own extravagance and the people's plight.

DumbGamerTag94
06-12-2014, 10:12 PM
I don't see how he couldn't of. Especially after the women's march on Versailles. They literally demanded it of him. And he had to have known before that point because he is the one that called the convention of "estates"(clergy,nobles,and commoners). Which formed the semi constitutional monarchy that didn't end up lasting long.

But the people didn't really ask for representation. They wanted not to starve. They actally used to like Louis. The march on Versailles actually ended in chants of "Viva la Roi"(which I believe translates to long live the king). But when the starvation and hardship continued they realized he was beyond saving. And the radical elements gained support. Took control of the government and eliminated the King(and most of the rest if the 2nd estate). These were the men that are "just as vile". The Jacobins and their reign of terror.

LoyalACFan
06-12-2014, 10:14 PM
Why the hell did that censor the middle of Jacobin?

DumbGamerTag94
06-12-2014, 10:16 PM
I know right? I had to go in and misspell it. It doesn't block the non plural form tho. It's weird
There it's fixed. I don't know what the deal with that was?

xryanx28
06-12-2014, 11:10 PM
When they announced that AC unity I was very excited but, I know for a fact that the game will just be a Catholic hater. Masons vs. Catholics. I think that both sides had fault in the revo but the people were FAR worse. I hope they don't portray the people as saints. Ill still buy the game but I'll hate the AC devs a little bit more than I already do ;)

Saqaliba
06-12-2014, 11:13 PM
No one likes bourgeois regality, but I can think of nothing worse than a literalistic mob-mentality (democracy ewww).

Megas_Doux
06-12-2014, 11:13 PM
When they announced that AC unity I was very excited but, I know for a fact that the game will just be a Catholic hater.

As usual in the franchise!

But you wont see the "equality" patrol making riots in that case......

ze_topazio
06-12-2014, 11:27 PM
Kings in this franchise are also treated in a very unfavorably way, always called corrupts and stupids, nobility in general is treated in a very biased way, always portrayed as the stereotypical arrogant evil bastards.

Shahkulu101
06-12-2014, 11:28 PM
^ Most of them were greedy bastards that's not really arguable.

DinoSteve1
06-12-2014, 11:35 PM
Hello Ubisoft,
hello guys,

first, ACU is absolutely stunning and I cannot wait to paly it especially because the French Revolution is one of my favourite historic periods.
I went to a French school and as I started researching outside class about the French Revolution, I found out that things weren't as black and white as they were described in any school book.

Regarding the King Louis XVI and Queen Marie-Antoinette, I am sure you have done your homework for ACU :)
In short, these two didn't want to rule, and they certainly did not know how to, and they were surrounded by people who took advantage of them, corrupt people, but I would not call the King "headstrong", even less "corrupt" as shown at the beginning of one of the gameplay trailers (http://youtu.be/s3USVnzXZPo).

I am sure you have a great story line in mind too for ACU -I really cannot wait to see the final game.
You'll forgive me for posting this, but I hope your story shows some nuances to the French Revolution that are commonly not very well known :)

Take care!
You do realise that this isn't an accurate representation of history?

ze_topazio
06-12-2014, 11:36 PM
^ Most of them were greedy bastards that's not really arguable.

They weren't really that bad, they lived on their own little world with their little absurdities, pride, traditions and fancy titles and they had the monopoly on the money, but randomly abusing commoners and killing them for getting in their way while twirling their mustache and laughing was a rare behavior.

Shahkulu101
06-12-2014, 11:38 PM
They weren't really that bad, they lived on their own little world with their little absurdities, pride, traditions and fancy titles and they had the monopoly on the money, but randomly abusing commoners and killing them for getting in their way while twirling their mustache and laughing was a rare behavior.

To this day I laugh at how caricature King Louis from ACB was.

Megas_Doux
06-12-2014, 11:41 PM
To this day I laugh at how caricature King Louis from ACB was.

Do you mean Varon de Valois????

The moustached guy????

Shahkulu101
06-12-2014, 11:54 PM
Do you mean Varon de Valois????

The moustached guy????

Oh yeah, him.

ze_topazio
06-12-2014, 11:55 PM
This is not the first time I see someone confusing him with the King of France.

Megas_Doux
06-12-2014, 11:57 PM
Oh yeah, him.

He was AWFUL haha,

ubiuni
06-13-2014, 07:56 AM
You do realise that this isn't an accurate representation of history?

I absolutely do, but given the number of people this game reaches (not only gamers but also throught media) I believe it would be nice to stick -as much as an invented story about assassins and templars allows- to historic facts.

The problem is that it took the French almost 200 years to rehabilitate Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette.

It would be a shame if ACU ignored that but no matter what, I hope people will be curious to read more about the French Revolution after playing the game :)

pirate1802
06-13-2014, 08:08 AM
To this day I laugh at how caricature King Louis from ACB was.

Wait that was King Louis?

WTF!

ubiuni
06-13-2014, 08:20 AM
Just stoumbled on this:

Swatch had its commercial censored for bad humour on Marie Antoinette losing her head.
For those of you who read French: http://www.tdg.ch/economie/entreprises/paris-censure-slogan-douteux-pub-swatch/story/15061207

It's only a game I know :) but still...

Feel free to call me crazy ;)

LatinaC09
06-13-2014, 12:50 PM
Corrupt doesn't mean you have to be aware. It literally means tainted or debased of character/perverted. Louis allowed those people to corrupt him. Not that he was literally corrupt himself. But he WAS corrupted by others. And his position of power and ability to stop it makes him no less guilty. He is just as bad no matter how good he is or how well intentioned.

What u are using is called the Nuremberg defense. It's what the Nazis used after WW2 to spare the hangmans noose. They claimed that they were only following orders. That they couldn't put a stop to murdering millions of people. But yet they partook in it. So they were still found guilty for allowing it to perpetuate. A train conductor that hauls cargo to Auschwitz is just as guilty as the man who ordered it or influenced him. If he knew it was wrong he should have stood up. Well that defense doesn't work. And they were found guilty and executed.

Same goes for Louis. Unintentionally allowin thousands of French people to starve because your advisors told you to is no different from a Nazi that murders millions against their will because they were ordered to. Even worse for Louis he wasn't bound by orders. He had the power to stop it and didn't.

That's corruption. And to allow people that blatently corrupted to influence you is either corruption on Louis part or shear incompetence. And deserved execution on that allone. Also the excesses in which he and his wife partook during such terrible times in his country(all funded by tax). Is treasonous and corrupt by any standard

I don't think things were always black and white. King Louis never wanted the throne and I think he was just taking advice from the people who were already in power before him. Not that it excuses anything but for some reason Marie-Antoinette and King Louis tend to be looked at as this completely scandalous royalty but I really think they (as you said) were following orders to to speak. They were trying to do what people did before them but this time they had many others in on the action manipulating their decisions. They were more ignorant than anything I would say but definitely not tyrants.

SenseHomunculus
06-13-2014, 01:11 PM
History is written by the victors. Always been that way, always will be.

STDlyMcStudpants
06-13-2014, 04:57 PM
I refer you to the quote in my signature
And AC1
Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

Hans684
06-13-2014, 05:09 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-life_of_knowledge

Sushiglutton
06-13-2014, 05:12 PM
I'm just gonna put this in here:

Arno's Austrian heritage is kind of interesting as Marie Antoinette also had that. Very curious to see what the connection between Arno and Anette is (Arno grew up at Versaille).

ze_topazio
06-13-2014, 06:19 PM
Considering the many uninformed comments I saw around the Internet, it's important to mention that Versailles is a small city in the outskirts of Paris, the famous palace is located there and not in the middle of Paris, so Arno didn't necessarily grow up inside the palace, nor in the middle of Paris.

Sushiglutton
06-13-2014, 06:21 PM
Considering the many uninformed comments I saw around the Internet, it's important to mention that Versailles is a small city in the outskirts of Paris, the famous palace is located there and not in the middle of Paris, so Arno didn't necessarily grow up inside the palace, nor in the middle of Paris.

Also I called Marie "Anette" :D

ze_topazio
06-13-2014, 06:34 PM
Nothing wrong with affectionate pet nicknames.

Shahkulu101
06-13-2014, 06:35 PM
Wait that was King Louis?

WTF!

No I made a mistake that was Varon de Valois.

I thought that was an older King Louis.

Animusaurus
06-14-2014, 03:35 PM
Marie Antoinette and King Louis were corrupted by their court and were hated by the public.

She was from Austria, and France had never gotten on with them…she was named the Osttereichchenne (Austrian *****) by nobles and the public alike, she was also said to be a bad mother…this was wrong too, she was also said to be working with Austria to essentially cause France trouble..there was also a lot of rumours that she was lesbian and adulterous.

They both spent quite a lot of money too, and where liked when they were on the throne early, but soon they were demonised by rumours and scandals, they spent money on their own pleasure (who wouldn't?), like when Marie Antoinette built a small model hamlet i forgot the name of for her children.

In the end they were torn apart form eacthother, and got their heads stuck on spikes…


Lovley.