1. #1

    ACU History - A list of demonstrable lies and inaccuracies **SPOILERS**

    Okay, there seems to be the general confusion why Assassin's Creed Unity is offensive and wrong on a historical level, what the French left getting on the case and gamers having the, understandable, knee-jerk defense of "it's a game" and fantasy and so on. Knowing the game's main missions, brotherhood missions and side-missions so I am going to provide a list of demonstrable falsehoods that are in the game and why people will find that offensive and how far the series has fallen from its earlier standards of accuracy.

    Now bear in mind, I fully support the fact that Assassin's Creed are games and are not documentaries. I fully support that. When I judge accuracy in the game, I judge the game on "fairness" rather than hundred percent accuracy. I have no problem with moving dates, changing and altering events for narrative reasons(as long as it doesn't get absurd as in one instance written below). As long as they get basic facts and broad accuracy, I have no issue. This isn't about whether certain historical figures are Templars whether they make sense as Templars and the like, they made a choice and I will abide by that so long as it gets facts of that historical figure/person right, my issues however have to do with persistent bias and slander to create sympathy for one faction over another.

    EDIT: UPDATED as of 30th November, 2014. As per the request of Derp43, I have added historical sources for fact-checking. Where possible I have cited academic articles online, FAQs and book reviews since these are shorter and easier to read rather than full books. In some cases I give appropriate Google Book Links which obviously I cannot excerpt but which contains the relevant information.

    For a quick, concise, accurate summary of it, written for general readers(and with good sources), the TV tropes page is actually pretty detailed:
    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...enchRevolution

    Single Player Campaign
    Spoiler:  Show

    SEQUENCE 1 - SEQUENCE 8(MEMORY 1) (19 MEMORIES)
    I am going to give credit to Ubisoft, these sequences are fair. The Estates-General and the Storming of Bastille happen more or less the same way they do in history. Mirabeau's truce with de la Serre has the spirit of initial unity that fit the Revolution. So far the metaphor is not implausible. The only inaccuracy is that there is no way that Arno will be sent to Bastille for being accused of Murder. Bastille was a prison for debtors, political and moral criminals and general imbeciles. For the crime of murder, especially of an aristocrat at Versailles, Arno would be sent to a tougher prison but I am going to let this pass since its too iconic a moment for Arno to miss out on. Now the producers have stated that they are avoiding the historical element of the series by not making Arno front and center of the Revolution, so until say, the mission where Arno invades the Tuileries and meets Napoleon, I will say that the game is fair and not offensive. Then it eventually goes off the rails.

    SEQUENCE 8(MEMORY 2) - THE SEPTEMBER MASSACRES(1 Memory)
    Where it goes off the rails is the September Massacres, a mission where your target sadistically sings La Marseillaise in Alex DeLarge fashion by submitting the prison warden to ultra-violence.

    The Elephant in the Living Room is something that goes unmentioned in the entire single player campaign, the central event of the French Revolution, is the 1792 Declaration of War.

    In history, when the Constitutional Monarchy was on its last ebb, a faction of the Republicans known to history as the Girondins(not their name at the time) decided to declare a pre-emptive war to "Spread the Revolution". This war was supported by the King and Queen because they felt that it would divert and diffuse the revolutionary tensions. The people who opposed this war...those crazy extremists Marat and Robespierre who felt that democracies had no right to go to other nations and impose freedom at the end of a gun. That's right the moderates believed in war to distract people from reforms and break deadlock, the extremists were anti-war because they thought it could lead to military dictatorship and set reforms back even more than the Old Regime. The Queen of France, Saint Marie Antoinette personally gave information of French military preparations to the the Austrians in the hope of sabotaging the French war effort. And sure enough, France after some initial victories started losing. This led to the September Massacres where people of Paris, in panic decided to invade prisons and murder political prisoners and in the end, they killed common criminals, prostitutes and priests along with political prisoners. In the game, this is shown as a Templar tactic of intimidation because, Templars, amirite?

    SOURCES: There are several books which cover this, but I am using these two short links, since they are by respected academics and its concise:
    Spoiler:  Show
    http://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/064...;view=fulltext
    SYLVIA NEELY:
    - "Once proclaimed in the spring of 1792, war dominated Europe for almost twenty-five years. The development of the Terror is inconceivable without the background of war and the paranoia that came with it."
    - "In the twentieth century, imbued with the pacifist strain of the left wing in France, many historians seemed somewhat embarrassed to find that the heroic people of revolutionary myth had been so bellicose. They focused on Robespierre, who opposed the war because he feared putting too much power in the hands of the aristocrats, and they came to believe that the Mountain joined him in opposing the war, which could then be blamed exclusively on the Girondins. Revolutionaries at the time, however, sided with Brissot, not Robespierre. At the trial of the Girondins in 1793, Brissot was accused of fomenting war against England in 1793 when the country was not sufficiently prepared."

    DAVID AVROM BELL - This is a review of a recent book that is anti-Revolutionary but corrects the same facts. Here he describes the September Massacres:
    - "Upon the news that the Prussian army had broken through French lines and was marching on Paris, crowds of sans-culottesstormed the prisons and killed at least 1,200 alleged counterrevolutionaries."


    SEQUENCE 9(MEMORY 1 and 2)(2 Memories)
    This mission tells us that the evil psychopathic Templars artifically created the entire food crisis and famine that drove the popular movement outside and inside Paris. Basically the royal family were unfairly targeted by those evil Jacobin Templars and their merchants and poor widdle Louis XVI was absolutely blameless. The food crisis and its relation to war naturally goes unmentioned.
    SOURCE
    Spoiler:  Show
    For this I will cite a wikipedia article since its well sourced in these instances. In any case the idea of a single group creating a faction is such an absurdity that it has never been posed to be outright disproven in detail.
    -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacte_de_Famine This one talks about how conspiracies about witholding grain were common in pre-Revolution times and how they were usually wrong but used as a political tool.
    -Another article mentions another cause - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_F...of_the_revolts
    "The rural unrest can be traced back to the spring of 1788, when a drought threatened the prospect of the coming harvest. Harvests had in fact been bad ever since the massive 1783 Laki volcanic eruption on Iceland. Storms and floods also destroyed much of the harvest during the summer, leading to a fall in seigneurial dues and defaults on leases."
    - So in other words, no one person could have been responsible for such widescale famine.


    SEQUENCE 10 (2 Memories)
    The biggest lie is the execution of the King, which they said comes down to one vote 361-360, with a Templar puppet casting the key vote. The King's execution enjoyed a majority of 394 for Death to 321 for imprisonment. Of the 394, 34 wanted Death with Delaying Conditions, 360 wanted immediate summary execution. The King was extraordinarily guilty by any stretch of the definition thanks to another incidient not mentioned in the game, called the Flight to Varennes, when the King and Queen went to Austria where a foreign army was ready for the King to command to invade France. In the game, the Templars kill the King because the Bad Guy had this speech that the writers thought was cool and evil, but is a poorly written Bond Speech instead, missing only the Evil Laugh. In the game, Hero Assassin kills LePeletier. In real-life he was murdered by a royalist fanatic who wanted to uphold feudal monarchy, so make of that what you will.
    SOURCES:
    Spoiler:  Show
    DAVID P. JORDAN's Book The King's Trial is there on Full View in Google Books. This Link takes you to the Appendix that deals with the issues of vote-count and whatnot, it uses archive research and discusses earlier attempts to make it a shorter queue. It is usually considered the best book on the Trial in English and written by a respected historian.
    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=0...page&q&f=false


    SEQUENCE 11 - SEQUENCE 12(Memory2) (4 Memories)
    I will say, that Robespierre in the Single Player campaign doesn't come off too badly, aside from being a Templar. The Brotherhood missions are a different thing which I will deal with later. But in the single player, Robespierre is this meek pedantic dude who seems a little weird with his Festival of a Supreme Being and while that is not flattering, it isn't unfair either. It's certainly a legitimate area of criticism to put him under. The real falsehood is the Mission "The Fall of Robespierre" where Arno finds out that the Paris Commune freed Robespierre by murdering a bunch of guards and they defend their leader with violence. There was no violence at all that day on Robespierre's part or his faction and Robespierre refused until the end to raise calls for the Paris Commune to attack the National Guard.
    SOURCES: This link by Author Marisa Linton(a respected academic at Kingston university, author of CHOOSING TERROR) conveys it well:
    Spoiler:  Show

    http://www.port.ac.uk/special/france...d,20545,en.pdf
    "The Terror began to wind down after Thermidor – though not immediately; the greatest days of carnage on the guillotine were the 10 and 11 Thermidor, as supporters of Robespierre, within the Convention, the Revolutionary Tribunal and the Paris Commune,were despatched before enthusiastic crowds. The deputies who had conspired to bring about Thermidor were themselves active Jacobins, including members of the ruling Committees, together with several men such as Fouché and Tallien, who had aroused suspicion from Robespierre for the excessive zeal with which they had employed terrorist methods while they had been on mission."


    SEQUENCE 12 - THE TEMPLE(1 Memory)
    Evil Boring Templar gives this speech about how the Revolution was masterminded by him to destroy the old order, who they framed, backstabbed and executed. The Revolution's violence did not come out of circumstances and difficult moral conundrums but out of an evil plot to show people that Revolutions will always be violent. Basically, the Assassins are on the side of the Constitutional Monarchy that came out of the Tennis Court Oath, that is "a peaceful" revolution, while the Templars represent the Violent Revolution of Bastille, Tuileries and the Terror. In other words, the Templars are shown to side with the people and the people are made to look like idiots(By the way almost every adult Parisian Male across class lines was literate at the time of the French Revolution). Poor King Louis was killed because he was framed not because he conspired with foreign powers to invade France. Basically it says that the people really didn't hate the King or have a reason to hate the good king Louis and his wife but were made to do so by a pack of evil middle-class people and envious scumbags that comprise the Templars. All I will say that this latter interpretation derives from a real-life book called ''Histoire des Jacobins'' by Abbe Barruel which was the first book that stated that conspiracy theories inspired the French Revolution.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memoirs...ion_and_legacy

    The French Revolution was a complex event several years in the making, the idea that it was done by a few people in a dark room because one guy believed he was the reincarnation of Jacques de Molay and wanted revenge is...well...let's just say I miss Rodrigo and his Staff of Eden, that was way more subtle and believable.

    I don't want to add any sources for this, but I will quote David A. Bell, author of The First Total War in the same Book Review I excerpted above:
    "But history does not have the neatness, or the moral clarity, of conspiracy fiction. There was no Great Copt plotting out the events of the French Revolution and driving it forward."



    Brotherhood Missions

    The game's brotherhood co-op missions are supposed to represent real events which the developers couldn't work in the single player so they made it for co-op. So let's run through them.

    Among these Missions, there are five that I would call Fair. By fair I mean even if there is artistic license and inaccuracies, I don't think its something worth getting worked up over, since the spirit and content is broadly correct.

    Spoiler:  Show

    1) Women's March - It overemphasizes Theorigne de Mericourt's role but since she is a historical badass and is obscure, I am going to pardon it and the mission as such is harmless.

    2) The Food Chain - Another Theroigne One. Not historical, more fictional, again the usual Templar conspiracy motif, so I am going to pardon this.

    3) The Austrian Conspiracy - Now this mission sort of touches on the war. So I will give it credit, the fact that the war is dialed down and reduced to the side is itself a grotesque simplification but I am not going to get into that. It does get into some of the paranoid atmosphere that happened at the time, where people were worried about royalist conspirators everywhere. Now whether Danton could actually wield a sword and fight, anyway I'll let it pass. One major mis-step. This mission takes place in September 1792 at the same time the September Massacres happen in history and the main game. Danton was Ministry of Justice at this time and pretty much looked the other way when the Massacres happened and convinced everyone to agreee with it. The point is this mission is lacking in proper context and Danton is presented as a simplistic good guy.

    4) The Tournament - A nice fun harmless mission dedicated to the coolness of Thomas-Alexandre Dumas. Not really about history, since it revolves around a fictional General Marcourt who looks and sounds like Errol Flynn.

    5) Infernal Machine - Another harmless mission about bodyguarding Napoleon. Nothing controversial or especially wrong. Except Napoleon should have a hair cut, and be wearing a Red Coat since he was First Consul/Dictator of France.



    The remaining Six missions though are a pack of lies.
    Spoiler:  Show

    6) Political Persecution - Now the Lying Begins. The Girondins are brought down because they disagreed with the Evil Robespierre and Danton is shown as a bleeding heart liberal who doesn't want Robespierre to launch Terror. In actual fact, it was Danton who justified the Terror, "Let us be terrible so that the people who don't have to be", he was the one who put in place the Revolutionary Tribunals and he sat on the Committee of Public Safety for two full months before Robespierre got elected. Danton fully supported the fall of the Girondins and didn't go out of his way to save any of them.The man who did continually argue that 75 deputies be spared and not be persecuted, who did it time and again right through the Terror, that guy was Robespierre. As for the Girondins, those guys it has to be said, plunged Europe into a 20 Year War for shady reasons of furthering their business interests and political cache. They also proved incompetent at winning the war and France was close to being invaded by the time the People rose against them and brought the Jacobins to power.
    SOURCES:
    Spoiler:  Show
    http://socialistreview.org.uk/339/danton
    "Before his fall from political grace Danton cleared the way for the reign of terror that reached its height in the summer of 1794. It was Danton who made the Committee of Public Safety the executive body of government in the summer of 1793. It was Danton who created the infamous revolutionary tribunal ("Let us be terrible to prevent the people from being terrible!")."[/url]


    7) Danton's Sacrifice - This famous incident, the source of Danton's good name gets even more biased to make Danton look good and Robespierre as a sadist but aside from that it has the right details. Danton was executed for political reasons at a show trial and it was a catastrophic moment for the Revolution. He is still sympathetic even if he was, as is widely proven, corrupt, deeply involved in bribes and stock market fraud. There's no need to make him a saint or martyr. What he was is a victim, of the very Terror and Tribunals that he had himself installed.
    SOURCES:
    Spoiler:  Show

    Book Review - by Miguel Faria of David Lawday's ''DANTON: Giant of the French Revolution"
    http://www.haciendapub.com/articles/...nch-revolution
    "But returning to the book at hand, in Lawday makes a fairly good case for absolving Danton of having connived in the Duke of Brunswick bribe affair just prior to the Battle of Valmy (1792); but does not do as well in exculpating him from involvement in the horrible September Massacres."
    "Lawday also exculpates Danton for his incitation to violence and repeated calls for death to the "enemies of the Revolution" as flowery language. How were the people, the fickle Parisian mobs and the violent sans culottes, always thirsting for savage revenge, to know that Danton's incitations were "parliamentary theater" and only "figures of speech"?

    This is from a Film Review, a rather long article:
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&client=safari
    " Most French historians today probably would concede that Danton's finances do not stand up to close scrutiny. In 1789 he was a not especially successful lawyer loaded down with at least 43,000 livres in debts. In 1791 he paid off his creditors andbought an estate worth 80,000 livres without an ostensible improvement in his practiceor the acquisition of another legitimate source of income. He probably took moneyfrom the court. But a politician may fatten his purse without betraying his country, andDanton certainly led the resistance to the invading armies after the overthrow of themonarchy on August 10, 1792."


    8) Heads Will Roll - This mission is fictional but again we have a demonical, evil, Robespierre who sells out his own spy when the guy digs up dirt that Robespierre was a Templar. This needless to say never happened since Templars don't exist. The only purpose it serves is to make Robespierre be a scumbag hypocrite.

    9) Les Enrages - Now the Enrages were a bunch of extremists yes. They did advocate for seizure of private property, radical redistribution and were proto-anarchists. What they weren't are psychopaths, Jacques Roux didn't run around plucking heads off necks with his bare hands. He didn't strangulate people with chains either. So another ghoul show and falsification that serves to demonize the popular movement.


    10) Moving Mirabeau - Another bit of falsehood. The evil Robespierre now removes the Saintly Mirabeau's remains from the Pantheon. This happened months after Robespierre died. Robespierre didn't order it. Now on learning fo Mirabeau's corruption, which the Girondins had revealed not him, Robespierre did call for him to be removed from the Pantheon and ordered statues of him broken in the Jacobin Club. But he never bothered about Mirabeau after that, simply because work on a War Cabinet was far more important than settling petty scores.

    11) The Jacobin Raid - Crypto-Nazi Jacobins are tunneling to Argentina/Corsica but the people are led by Theroigne to bring them down. The Jacobins are shown to torture Theroigne by whipping her in a montage. In actual fact, Theroigne was attacked and beaten by Revolutionary women and the person who saved her was none other than crazy psycho Marat. The Jacobins are all shown as Robespierre lackeys when many of them joined in attacking him on the day of his fall. By the way, this action takes place the day after Robespierre's execution. In actual history, the day after Robespierre's execution, 77 of his supporters were executed without trial, the largest mass guillotine of the entire Terror.
    SOURCES:
    Spoiler:  Show
    For Marat rescuing Theroigne
    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=S...0Marat&f=false
    Another link, behind a pay wall, but its written by author Hilary Mantel:
    http://www.lrb.co.uk/v14/n10/hilary-...scued-by-marat




    PARIS SIDE STORIES
    Now my main problem with the SIDE MISSIONS is just that a lot of the time, its very shoddy work. I mean there are basic errors in facts, the kind of errors that undergraduate students would be embarassed about. So some of these missions are offensive only for its incompetence.
    Spoiler:  Show

    1) American Prisoner (DLC MISSION) - Now this one isn't inaccurate or malicious, but it is INCOMPETENT.The gist is that Thomas Paine is under house arrest in this prison and the warden has his book ''The Rights of Man'' which he was working on. A single look at wikipedia can tell you that the reason Thomas Paine was ''invited'' to France was because of THE RIGHTS OF MAN, a book which defended the French Revolution against English conservative Edmund Burke. The book Paine was working on while imprisoned during the Terror is THE AGE OF REASON, a book that is critical of Christianity(albeit froma Deist/Theist perspective). Why this basic fact is neglected I don't know. And by the way the guy who conspired to get Paine imprisoned was the American Ambassador in France at the time, Gouvernor Morris.

    2) A Romantic Stroll - Arno being an Assassin and oblivious lackey/b-tch of Napoleon that he is, serves as secret service on Napoleon's romantic date with Josephine. This is a kind of cute mission overall. Except for one thing. Josephine calls herself a divorcee. This is ridiculous for many reasons, namely the fact that Josephine's husband was guillotined during the Terror(while Josephine herself was imprisoned). The man who signed that execution order was none other than Jacques-Louis David, great painter, future friend and collaborator of Napoleon(who quite obviously was grateful for the assist). I don't know why they said divorcee when she could have said, "My husband's dead" and "I don't want to talk about it" or they could simply not mention it at all since it is a side story. Why go out of the way to lie?
    SOURCES


    3) Chemical Revolution (DLC Mission) - Jean-Paul Marat is not just a journalist but some kind of mob-boss who sent thugs to attack the great Lavoisier because he's jealous of him. This incident never happened. Marat was dead in early 1793 and played no role at all in the persecution and death of Lavoisier, but invoking his name kind of attaches him to slander. Marat played a major role in the ousting of the Girondins (who lavoisier was close to) but that clash was non-violent and the Girondin leaders were sent to the guillotine while Robespierre rescued 75 deputies from joining their ranks against the wishes of more bloodthirsty advocates.

    4)) Coat-Of-Arms - My favorite piece of bilge unearthed in UNITY yet. One of the actual honest-to-God badasses in the French Revolution is Louis Antoine de Saint-Just. This guy was gorgeous. He was also a Robespierre loyalist and made his mentor look cuddly by comparison. He was also brilliant, he co-wrote the 1793 Constitution, super-competent and a great military organizer. And he was 26 years old when he did that. What he wasn't is a psychopath. This story is based on an "anecdote" published in a work of fiction issued in 1820 that Saint-Just once tried to seduce a woman and when she turned him down, Saint-Just had her killed and then skinned her and made her human hide into breeches for him to wear. Because everyone likes Game of Thrones and why not make Saint-Just into Ramsay Bolton, even if the only source is a lie that even right-wing historians never take seriously.

    5) Up-In-Arms - Another piece of vile slander. Apparently the Commitee of Public Safety under Robespierre and Saint-Just are working to sabotage Napoleon's career by spiking his cannons so that it will blow up. This one is absurd. The Commitee of Public Safety gave Napoleon his first big promotion via Robespierre's little brother who served as their representative in Toulon. Napoleon wasn't in Paris during the Terror and the only time he came to their notice was in Robespierre's last days when his brother gave him a letter formulating a military plan of his to him. Napoleon was a lifelong defender of the Terror, apologist for Robespierre right unto Saint Helena and in private told anyone and everyone that the Committee of Public Safety was the only real government of the Revoluton. In the game, Napoleon is this cool guy who complains about the bloodshed of the Revolution.
    SOURCES
    Spoiler:  Show
    http://books.google.co.in/books?id=S...hed%22&f=false
    "Do you believe the men who led France in 1793 chose the Terror for pleasure? Absolutely not. Robespierre hated bloodshed as much as I. He was restrained by events and, I repeat, by conviction. He did it out of humanity, to stop the massacres, to control the resentments of the people. He created the revolutionary tribunals as a surgeon saves lives by amputating limbs."
    -- NAPOLEON


    6) Flying Boy - The famous physicist Laplace is in Paris during 1793-1794. He was actually in the countryside but here he's there to stop the bad science of the Revolutionaries. It again serves no other purpose other than to slander the Revolution by bringing up all the scientists and artists they persecuted (the artists and scientists who supported the Revolution are obviously ignored).


    MURDER MYSTERIES
    Spoiler:  Show

    1) The Assassination of Marat
    Now why this mission is a "Murder Mystery" I have no idea. If ever there was a murder lacking in mystery. But the whole point of the mission is to explore what a pathetic waste of a human being Marat was. We see Jacques-Louis David painting Marat at his crime scene, an embellishment that is poetic and so I will forgive. Then we meet Marat's wife, dressed to resemble her actress in Marat/Sade and she and Marat's sister Albertine, complains about how Marat leeched them dry with his lifestyle. In real-life, these women loved Marat and preserved his writings and memory for several years. You have a Girondin dude complain about how Marat persecuted him for suspicions of treason and he wanted to die a martyr, completely whitewashing the Girondins involvement in warmongering and political corruption. Then we meet Charlotte Corday who isn't looked at too much but is basically seen as a woman who is cool and did the world a favor. I like Marat and I like Charlotte too, so I'd like ambiguity but all the same, pathetic.

    2) A Body in a Brothel (see also DE SADE's REPRIEVE in PARIS SIDE STORY)
    Now generally, the game kind of whitewashes Marquis de Sade. I don't have problems in so far as Sade is otherwise quite misunderstood. The real guy was an ambiguous, scary figure who wrote about power and how the strong will always oppress the weak, a philosophy that the game reduces to "freedom" and kinky sex with sex workers(to whom Sade is a generous pimp apparently). The real guy's ideas are better conveyed in MARAT/SADE. The real Sade during the Revolution was an out of work playwright who had relationships with actresses. He became a member of the radical ward of Piques but he was too independent minded. During the Terror, he served on a tribune and generally got people off, criminals, political prisoners, even a couple of aristocratic enemies who in the old days sent him to jail. De Sade got accused of "moderatism" and was sent to Prison and then transfered to a mental asylum in Picpus (where outside the window he'd see beheaded bodies being buried). The game presents this as Sade being persecuted for being a degenerate with the Evil Psychopath Saint-Just paying a butler to murder a prositute to arrest him. Again this kind of fiction serves no other purpose than to slander the Revolution. The real reasons why Sade was sent to jail cast them in a bad enough light already and shows Sade in a very good light indeed. There's no need to make them super-psychopaths or reduce Sade to being persecuted solely for his sexual schenanigans rather than his political activity.

    There's also the fact of incompetence. One of the pieces of evidence that Arno finds is the book 120 Days of Sodom in a student's garret. That book was written in the Bastille by Sade and after its fall, the Marquis cried to everyone that it was gone for good. The book wouldn't be discovered until the 20th Century. Now they might have created something revolving around it, some mystery or some hint, but to casually drop it as a piece of evidence like this in a side mission is absurd and stupid


    Cafe-Theatre/Social Club Missions
    Spoiler:  Show

    1) Retribution for a Rabble Rouser
    This mission has you assassinating a Jacobin demagogue who is criticizing the Girondins. When you approach the guy, he talks about how the Girondins unleashed war. I am amazed that this fact gets thrown in here of all places and that we get to attack an anti-war critic. The Assassin Council tells you that the Girondins are the "moderate" faction, but the guy you are attacking shouts at people, "What's moderate about starting a war?" and then you have to ask, since the game doesn't, what's heroic about killing a guy who asks this basic truth.

    2) An Engaging Egyptologist - Another one for INCOMPETENCE. Now the famous Egyptologist Champollion was the Frenchman who decoded the Rosetta Stone for the first time. France invaded Egypt in 1799, an imperialist adventure Napoleon's PR team paralyed into an Enlightenment Science Project but anyway. Now the game is set between 1790-1794 broadly but the last brotherhood mission takes place in 1799 so I will allow references to a period as late as that in this game. But the problem is that Champollion was born in 1790, Arno's older than him by 20 f--king years, why do we see him as an adult interacting with Arno in this mission.

    3) Marat's Missive - Another mission where Marat gets slandered, apparently he gave some thugs license to kill and rob graves, because he's evil.

    4) Betrayer of the Queen - This mission has you attacking a Templar who prevented Marie Antoinette from escaping and played a role in slandering Mirabeau's reputation. Since Mirabeau was corrupt and accepted bribes from the royal government while trying to curtail reforms in the Assembly, I fail to see what they had to do to slander his reputation.

    Share this post

  2. #2
    Charles_Phipps's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ashland, Ky
    Posts
    537
    I have a shorter summation.

    This is worse history than the majority of governments being controlled with a magical apple.
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Dev_Anj's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    743
    So, how does the Reign of Terror end in this game? I hope it doesn't involve Napoleon and a Piece of Eden.

    Also thanks VestigaILlama4 for the history lesson.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    FYI the games were not made to be EXACTLY like history, Ubisoft is trying to fit in a fictional storyline and still try and remain close to the history. No you should teach a history class with AC. the game is much like a book written the same way... artistic interpretation, creative license is the thing to understand. It's a game... not a history lesson and should never be seen as anything but a game. So have fun with it... which most of us do.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    Especially with Abstergo Entertainment.. In Black Flag, there are many historical inaccuracies blatantly pointed out in the Database and Oliver (sp?) wanting it in the "game" anyway because it was awesome, like the Queen's Staircase in Nassau is a great example of this.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    They do explain in the database that not everyone wanted him dead immediately. And if my math is correct if 34 out of 394(for death is a lumping of a category of votes rather than separating it the way a government would vote on it). There were 3 prepositions 1 immediate death. 2 Indefinite stay of execution. 3 acquittal.
    So that means the vote would have been...
    360 death
    34 stay of execution/abstaining
    360 acquittal
    That's a tie. And no legislative government ever passes a tie. Nor do they lump in the next closest thing as being part of the majority vote. These numbers are very clearly an initial vote count. Meaning there would be a recount. And if the votes are recounted and once again tie.....the president of the assembly breaks the tie with 1 vote.
    And who was president of the assembly at that point? I'm pretty sure it was our target according to my memory and the database. So the 34 votes are irrelevant and a tie was broken between 360 and 360. Giving a final vote of 361 to 360. So I don't see what's wrong with that at all.

    And the war with Austria is mentioned tons of times in the game. Random conversations in the crowds. Brief mentions in Cutscenes. And if you read the newspapers it's in there too. I know there definitely was one in the papers when the war was declared.

    And that war was inevitable anyway. There's no Girondin conspiracy to evilly consolidate power by distracting the people(which is oddly your accusation in the very post where you say that the game makes Parisians looks like mindless puppets and they aren't....yet you accuse the Girondin of manipulating them?). Anyway. The King and Queen of Austria were Marie Antoinette's immediate family. And they didn't take kindly to Louis and Marie being locked up in the Touleries at bayonet point(they were essentially on house arrest during the"constitutional monarchy"). The Austrians sent letters and envoys to the National Assembly telling them that if anything happened to the King and Queen there would be war. They even began massing troops near the boarders of France. As did the Prussians. The Revolution was not popular with the rest of Europe. Britain Austria and Prussia wanted it smashed as soon as possible. The enemy was quite literally at the gates when the assembly decided to declare war......it was fight now....or fight later when we are poorer, bloodier, and out of revolutionary fervor(finances were a wreck at the time as was the ongoing revolutionary madness taking it's toll on morale). If they would have waited to long France would be out of money out of guns and out of will to fight.

    Ironically the war rekindled revolutionary fervor giving strength to the more radical Jacobin and other factions.

    As for Robespierre, Danton, Marat and others who wanted to avoid war......that's because at that point in time they were a bunch of bleeding heart liberals who opposed war for any reason, the death penalty, convictions without proper trial, and such other things that radical liberals like to "SAY"(important to note the word say). But then of course once their party gained control of the government they did a complete 180 and began. Conducting a Civil War against the very people of France(most notably in Vendee), executed the King,Queen,thousands of citizens, their Girondin Rivals, later the Dantonist rivals, and pretty much anybody deemed a threat to "France" aka Jacobin control of government. So yeah there's quite a big difference between what a person or group SAYS when they are not in power. And what they DO once power is given to them(or in this case taken in a coup/purge of Girondins). Actions speak much louder than words. Don't forget these men were politicians. A profession not especially well known for honesty.

    The last bit I wrote exactly points to some of the themes of Unity that they stated they were trying to convey. Namely the dangers of radicalism. And yesterday's radicals becoming today's moderates(Girondin were considered radical for there actions before they lost power. But then were the moderates in comparison to what followed).

    The French Revolution is a touchy subject and everyone has different takes on just about everything about it. But overall I think ACU did a fairly good job. There was inaccuracies here and there and stretched half truths here n there as well. But these are in every AC. they had to fit their story in somehow. This is a GAME after all not a history textbook or documentary.

    I think they may have marginalized the history a little too much though. It causes confusion. Missed details and not enough contextualization to be completely fair to some characters. The CO-OP missions should have been unlocked as you go and playable at that skill level in the campaign. So then they overall story would fit together better. Since the coop is canon/interconnected/a continuation of the main story line. The history just got marginalized in this game so much that it just expects you to know what's going on or pick up a brief reference in dialogue to fully understand everything. And when Arno does encounter historic events he is quite literally Forrest Gumping(in that when he does see something major he literally just walks in unintentionally with little or no context as to what or why something is going on). So I don't want to hear about Connor's "Gumping" anymore because he at least understood what was going on and why and often had an impact/reason to be at those events(aside from the continental congress that was BS). If any character thus far fits the bill of literally "Gumping" through history then it's definately Arno by far. I mean half the time he has no idea what's going on....cases in point the Estates General and Bastille.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Charles_Phipps's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ashland, Ky
    Posts
    537
    Originally Posted by ShadoeKat Go to original post
    FYI the games were not made to be EXACTLY like history, Ubisoft is trying to fit in a fictional storyline and still try and remain close to the history. No you should teach a history class with AC. the game is much like a book written the same way... artistic interpretation, creative license is the thing to understand. It's a game... not a history lesson and should never be seen as anything but a game. So have fun with it... which most of us do.
    I'm an academic and the Assassin's Creeds game great edutainment.

    There's a difference between portraying a secret society of Assassins vs. Templas occurring versus ignoring real-life causes of war to lionize unpleasant people and villify real-life ones.
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Bmark94 Go to original post
    They do explain in the database that not everyone wanted him dead immediately. And if my math is correct if 34 out of 394(for death is a lumping of a category of votes rather than separating it the way a government would vote on it). There were 3 prepositions 1 immediate death. 2 Indefinite stay of execution. 3 acquittal.
    ...
    That's a tie. And no legislative government ever passes a tie.
    I based my reasoning on a fine book by David P. Jordan called The King's Trial, generally regarded as the best book on the topic. It is only a tie if you think that Death By Delay jumbles with Acquittal/Clemency, rather than 1) A separate category altogether 2) Jumbled with Execution, with minority disagreeing on date of sentence. Now if its 1) A Separate category, its still 360>321>34. If its the other than 360+34>321. Now your reasoning is 3) Jumbling Delay with Clemency so that is still 360>321+34 which is 360>355, close but no tie.

    Bear in mind, that some of the people who voted for the King's execution tried to cover it up later so there is disagreements about the estimate, that is to say how big the majority was, not denying the majority. It was a royalist fantasy that the votes were passed by one vote since it better preserved the illusion that the people didn't want the King dead and a minority did backroom politics to kill the King. You don't have take my word for it, follow this link:http://books.google.co.in/books?id=0...&q=387&f=false

    And the war with Austria is mentioned tons of times in the game. Random conversations in the crowds. Brief mentions in Cutscenes. And if you read the newspapers it's in there too. I know there definitely was one in the papers when the war was declared.
    That is part of the point. It isn't mentioned in the context of the events. The September Massacres came out of defeats on the front. Here's it's a Templar Plot. The Terror was Emergency that came out of it. It's there as just info. None of the cutscenes in the single player mentioned it. It's only the sidemissions that tacke it.

    And that war was inevitable anyway. There's no Girondin conspiracy to evilly consolidate power by distracting the people(which is oddly your accusation in the very post where you say that the game makes Parisians looks like mindless puppets and they aren't....yet you accuse the Girondin of manipulating them?). Anyway. The King and Queen of Austria were Marie Antoinette's immediate family.
    Actually, the Austrians were sabre rattling and only concerned but weren't ready to turn on France. Neither was England. Robert Roswell Palmer in his Age of Democractic Revolutions and The Twelve Who Ruled as well as Sylvia Neely in this article[http://quod.lib.umich.edu/w/wsfh/064...view=fulltext] note that the external threat was considerably exaggerated and the Austrians wanted to avoid war and that the Girondins, led by Brissot(absent but we can collect his head for Tussaud) who agitated for it, for all sorts of shady reasons. And by the way the Austrians valued Marie Antoinette's life so much that despite Robespierre delaying her execution and Danton making several overtures to ransom her, they left her to die. Robespierre ultimately washed his hands off it when he and Danton couldn't stall for more time.

    But then of course once their party gained control of the government they did a complete 180 and began. Conducting a Civil War against the very people of France(most notably in Vendee)
    The Vendee rose against the Republic, they massacred 200 men, women and children at Machecoul, were fully taking support of guns and supplies from England to rebel against the Republic. During the American Civil War, the North committed war crimes against the South too, the Republicans did so in Vendee as well. The Vendeeans were anti-semitic, royalist and wanted to return to feudalism and they brutally attacked Republican Vendeeans who fully supported and welcomed the Revolution and fought with fervor against them. They weren't innocent, they committed several atrocities such as boiling people in oil alive.

    The French Revolution is a touchy subject and everyone has different takes on just about everything about it. But overall I think ACU did a fairly good job. There was inaccuracies here and there and stretched half truths here n there as well. But these are in every AC. they had to fit their story in somehow. This is a GAME after all not a history textbook or documentary.
    Despite that you should try and be fair, you cannot be so hopelessly one-sided as this game is and simply white-wash one side and blacken the other.

    In any case, Assassin's Creed is regarded as a slightly better than average sandbox game and stealth/action game because the history in the past games are unusually good. By the standards of Assassin's Creed, Unity is rotten history, leave alone academic history.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    ze_topazio's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Poortugal
    Posts
    7,206
    In the Assassin's Creed world that's how it happened, and the history books are wrong.

    All the previous games were full of inaccuracies and several historical events turned in to Templar and Assassin plots.

    I understand the French Revolution is personal to you or something but, you know, deal with it
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Charles_Phipps's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Ashland, Ky
    Posts
    537
    Originally Posted by ze_topazio Go to original post
    In the Assassin's Creed world that's how it happened, and the history books are wrong.

    All the previous games were full of inaccuracies and several historical events turned in to Templar and Assassin plots.

    I understand the French Revolution is personal to you or something but, you know, deal with it
    He is, by complaining it's crappy storytelling.
    Share this post

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... Last ►►