Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of production'

[Robert Maxwell]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Why does historical accuracy only matter when a game puts women on the battlefield?

One of the many post-release fixes for Total War: Rome 2, Daughters of Mars, has involved the addition of female soldiers, and a very vocal minority of players are suddenly very concerned with ancient history.

The historical argument is always a red herring. It's a derail. It's not an honest attempt at good faith discussion, but a way to distract from the central issue.

Example: strategy RPG The Banner Saga, which is based on Viking/Norse mythology and history, allows female characters in a single role--archers. Why are women not allowed to be front-line combatants? According to the developers, because this was not permitted in that culture. Even so, this is a game that features monsters with horns growing through their skulls and various other fantastical elements. The game developers still feel they can trot out a "historical" argument for not allowing women in all combat positions. In essence, fantastical creatures that never existed are more believable than human woman in melee combat. It's sexism, pure and simple.

You know it utterly baffles me how gender representation has become such a divisive topic in gaming. I actually saw something the other day where someone was complaining that Bioware was being prejudiced against men because so far, most of their released gamplay footage from DAI has featured a female Inquisitor....the mind boggles.

Never underestimate the rampant insecurity of many men, which manifests most openly as misogyny and chauvinistic bravado.

 

[Reverend]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

^It's not exclusively a male trait, but it does seem a lot of males of said disposition have been cocooning themselves in the gamer communities. It just amazes me how vocal the buggers can be, but I suppose net anonymity has something to do with amplifying that.

Example: strategy RPG The Banner Saga, which is based on Viking/Norse mythology and history, allows female characters in a single role--archers. Why are women not allowed to be front-line combatants? According to the developers, because this was not permitted in that culture. Even so, this is a game that features monsters with horns growing through their skulls and various other fantastical elements. The game developers still feel they can trot out a "historical" argument for not allowing women in all combat positions. In essence, fantastical creatures that never existed are more believable than human woman in melee combat. It's sexism, pure and simple.

In that particular example, I'm not sure I agree. As you say it's based on both Norse history and *mythology*. Said mythology is full of fantastical creatures and yet the presence of such doesn't automatically mean all rules go out the window since they're patterning off of an existing template, with which they're at least partially grounding with some historical authenticity. It's part of what gives the game it's aesthetic identity and as such is a valid artistic choice.

It's the same logic that says that portraying people of African ethnicity in a subservient role isn't inherently racist *if* the game is set in say, 17th century West Indies. Context matters.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

^It's not exclusively a male trait, but it does seem a lot of males of said disposition have been cocooning themselves in the gamer communities. It just amazes me how vocal the buggers can be, but I suppose net anonymity has something to do with amplifying that.

Example: strategy RPG The Banner Saga, which is based on Viking/Norse mythology and history, allows female characters in a single role--archers. Why are women not allowed to be front-line combatants? According to the developers, because this was not permitted in that culture. Even so, this is a game that features monsters with horns growing through their skulls and various other fantastical elements. The game developers still feel they can trot out a "historical" argument for not allowing women in all combat positions. In essence, fantastical creatures that never existed are more believable than human woman in melee combat. It's sexism, pure and simple.

In that particular example, I'm not sure I agree. As you say it's based on both Norse history and *mythology*. Said mythology is full of fantastical creatures and yet the presence of such doesn't automatically mean all rules go out the window since they're patterning off of an existing template, with which they're at least partially grounding with some historical authenticity. It's part of what gives the game it's aesthetic identity and as such is a valid artistic choice.

It's the same logic that says that portraying people of African ethnicity in a subservient role isn't inherently racist *if* the game is set in say, 17th century West Indies. Context matters.

Are you playing Devil's Advocate here or making an actual serious response?

 

[SPCTRE]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Whatever the case, the concept of the skjadlsmaer (Shieldmaiden) comes from, that's right, Scandinavian mythology.

And I don't even want to go into citing historical accounts in ancient Scandinavian culture of women taking up the sword because I agree that the debate is usually not held in good faith.

 

[martok2112]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

But.... But....but... Maid Marion was a badass heroine chick type in Robin Hood? Right? I mean, Hollywood always gets female roles in movies right all the time? Don't they? Usually? Maybe?

 

[SPCTRE]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

 

[martok2112]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

^That attempt would not surprise me in the least.

Microsoft: please, Ubi, don't make Ps4's version look/run better than our version. Heeeeere's a little money to sweeten the deal.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

I wonder why the #GamerGaters don't care about this.

 

[SPCTRE]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

#collusion #journalisticintegrity #etc

 

[Skywalker]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Meh, I just bought a new PC, I'm above all this console nonsense now.

Just kidding. It's pretty messed up, and I have zero doubts that Ubisoft made this decision thanks to a little "friendly nudge" from Microsoft. Maybe if they hadn't hamstrung their console before they even released it, they wouldn't need to be making these backroom deals that does nothing but harm consumers.

 

[martok2112]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

It's Microshaft going back to their old practices.... "No one must have a better presentation than us. We will throw whatever monetary resources we have at them to ensure this is the case."

Yep...just more reason for me to not even look at an Xbox One now.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

That's pretty sad. I don't think Sony did that when the 360 was considered the better console. It's their own problem. I wish the devs would have enough integrity to stand up and refuse. MS could then say, "Ok, well your game won't be on our console." But then the dev could turn around and say, "Ok then, the PS4 has another exclusive!" If enough devs do that, it would be a disaster for MS.

 

[ATimson]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Meh, I just bought a new PC, I'm above all this console nonsense now.

Now you just get to wait an extra month for the game to come out.

That's pretty sad. I don't think Sony did that when the 360 was considered the better console.

Sony tended to pay for exclusive content (like with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood through Black Flag, or Bioshock Infinite including the original); I don't ever remember Xbox games getting similar deals.

Also, I didn't ever think the 360 was considered the better console; they were just different. While there were some games where the 360 version ran better, you'd have others where the PS3 version was superior.

 

[martok2112]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

The big deal about Xbox 360 was Xbox Live Gold. Period. XBL Gold was indeed a great service, and probably had lower dropout rates than PSN/PS Plus, and (supposedly) the 360 ran many of its games in 1080p, where most of PS3's games topped out at 720p. A few PS3 titles ran in 1080p.

Now, PS4's games all seem to run in 1080p, and Xbox One's seem to top out at about 900p.

Sony definitely has more first party exclusives. KillZone, Uncharted, The Last of Us, just to name a few. Xbox's big exclusive has always been Halo (once dev'd by Bungie, now dev'd by 343 Studios).

Now, since M$ is losing this generation's console war quite horribly, they're getting desperate, and throwing money at third party developers for limited time exclusives. One deal that has pissed off many fans/gamers is Rise of the Tomb Raider. Supposedly it is a limited time exclusive for Xbone, with PC and PS gamers being made to wait an uncertain amount of time for it to hit their platform of choice....and TR has almost always largely been played on PS and PC in the past. So, by M$ doing this, and Squeenix/Crystal Dynamics agreeing to it, they have essentially shafted the majority of their fanbase/gamerbase.

Personally, I am in no rush to get Rise of the Tomb Raider, because I still like old school, sexy and kickass Lara. But, I am empathetic toward those who have been waiting since the reboot for another TR game.

 

[ATimson]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

The big deal about Xbox 360 was Xbox Live Gold. Period. XBL Gold was indeed a great service, and probably had lower dropout rates than PSN/PS Plus, and (supposedly) the 360 ran many of its games in 1080p, where most of PS3's games topped out at 720p. A few PS3 titles ran in 1080p.

I'm pretty sure that "supposedly" is an untruth. Actually, I can't name any 360 games that ran at 1080p native, whereas I can name a couple of PS3 ones.

Now, PS4's games all seem to run in 1080p, and Xbox One's seem to top out at about 900p.

Most of Halo: The Master Chief Collection will be 1080p/60. But of course the exception is the single-player Halo 2 Anniversary campaign, the only one actually designed for Xbox One instead of being a 360 port.

Sony definitely has more first party exclusives. KillZone, Uncharted, The Last of Us, just to name a few. Xbox's big exclusive has always been Halo (once dev'd by Bungie, now dev'd by 343 Studios).

Also Fable and Gears of War. (The latter was developed by Epic but published by Microsoft, and is now owned by them too.)

First party exclusives are expensive, though. Cheaper to buy third-party exclusives, even if it's just timed (Bioshock, Mass Effect & 2, Rise of the Tomb Raider) than to publish it yourself & run the risk on it.

 

[martok2112]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

The big deal about Xbox 360 was Xbox Live Gold. Period. XBL Gold was indeed a great service, and probably had lower dropout rates than PSN/PS Plus, and (supposedly) the 360 ran many of its games in 1080p, where most of PS3's games topped out at 720p. A few PS3 titles ran in 1080p.

I'm pretty sure that "supposedly" is an untruth. Actually, I can't name any 360 games that ran at 1080p native, whereas I can name a couple of PS3 ones.

I had often wondered about that.

Now, PS4's games all seem to run in 1080p, and Xbox One's seem to top out at about 900p.

Most of Halo: The Master Chief Collection will be 1080p/60. But of course the exception is the single-player Halo 2 Anniversary campaign, the only one actually designed for Xbox One instead of being a 360 port.

Cool. Too bad I'm gonna miss out on it since M$ has lost a customer in me.

Sony definitely has more first party exclusives. KillZone, Uncharted, The Last of Us, just to name a few. Xbox's big exclusive has always been Halo (once dev'd by Bungie, now dev'd by 343 Studios).

Also Fable and Gears of War. (The latter was developed by Epic but published by Microsoft, and is now owned by them too.)

Ach....that's right. Oy! I guess I forgot about those titles. I wasn't overly impressed with Gears of War or Fable, so that's probably why I forgot them, but you are right, those are some more of Xbox 360's exclusives.

First party exclusives are expensive, though. Cheaper to buy third-party exclusives, even if it's just timed (Bioshock, Mass Effect & 2, Rise of the Tomb Raider) than to publish it yourself & run the risk on it.

makes sense. . But the underhanded nature in which M$ is going about it has not won them any more fans, especially from the Tomb Raider sect. I know it's business, but developers really do need to keep in mind just who does truly support them, and show some integrity toward their fans/supporters.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

That's pretty sad. I don't think Sony did that when the 360 was considered the better console.

Sony tended to pay for exclusive content (like with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood through Black Flag, or Bioshock Infinite including the original); I don't ever remember Xbox games getting similar deals.

But isn't that quite different? In that scenario, the games were still developed for both systems and it's been customary as of late to offer exclusive content depending on who you buy it from, though personally I dislike the practice. They never altered actual game performance.

Here you have a console manufacturer deliberately trying to alter the performance of a game on another console just so that they can appear to be on an even keel.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

That's pretty sad. I don't think Sony did that when the 360 was considered the better console.

Sony tended to pay for exclusive content (like with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood through Black Flag, or Bioshock Infinite including the original); I don't ever remember Xbox games getting similar deals.

But isn't that quite different? In that scenario, the games were still developed for both systems and it's been customary as of late to offer exclusive content depending on who you buy it from, though personally I dislike the practice. They never altered actual game performance.

Here you have a console manufacturer deliberately trying to alter the performance of a game on another console just so that they can appear to be on an even keel.

And you're right about the performance of the 360vsPS3. It really did depend on the game, though for the most part, it seemed devs used the 360 as their starting point when making multi-platform games, therefore you'd often get games that would look better on it, such as Red Dead Redemption for example. Right now what were seeing is the opposite, where the PS4 is the platform of choice, and the one that is most often compared to when there are multiple versions. And that's why MS doing this is pretty low of them. Instead of working to improve their console, they rather buy their way into making hurdles for the competition.

Edit: Whoops, sorry for the double post. Thought I was editing the other one. Not sure how that happened.

 

[SPCTRE]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Sony tended to pay for exclusive content (like with Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood through Black Flag, or Bioshock Infinite including the original); I don't ever remember Xbox games getting similar deals.

Also, I didn't ever think the 360 was considered the better console; they were just different. While there were some games where the 360 version ran better, you'd have others where the PS3 version was superior.

GTA IV's DLC was a timed exclusive for 360. That deal was a big story in industry circles at the time, although in the end it had a very negligible impact. These things are often more about PR posturing than significant sales impact.

As for your second point, it wasn't so much about "better", but about a lead platform in terms of development. In the same manner, PS4 is the lead platform at the moment, as they are leading significantly in terms of consoles sold through to consumers at this time.

So, "lead platform" meaning simply a larger installed base, i.e. multiplatform titles being developed with the 360's (now: PS4's) architecture in mind first and foremost, with optimization for the PS3's (now: XBONE's) being done after the fact, or simultaneously albeit with a slightly lower priority. The fact that the PS3's Cell architecture was more esoteric and generally more difficult to develop for didn't help, although developers overcame that obstacle pretty much completely over time.

 

[Skywalker]

Re: Lack of female assassins in Assassin's Creed? 'Reality of producti

Meanwhile, EA just tweeted this gem.