Assassin's Creed: Syndicate - Templars (All)
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 09. 2016
- (By special request)
Assassin's Creed: Syndicate and the Assassin's Creed series are created, owned, and produced by UbiSoft. All footage captured by me. I claim no ownership or copyright of the material used in this video. - Hry
''Whoever controls London controls the world.'' Ehh a few centuries later it's no longer that case anymore.
Rickiebobby1st London was so close to not even controlling Scotland.
well that was when the empires of reign now there history
Yes, excellent observation, but you see, at the point in time in which this story is set, London still was, which is why they said it.
I always wish in all of the "Assassin's Creed" games, except in "Assassin's Creed: Liberation", that we could spare some of the targets. And this game proves the importance of the compassion I have for them, because London, in the game's universe, could have kept some of its glory and importance if at least these orderly people had been spared:
-Doctor Elliotson;
-Lucy Thorne;
-Pearl Attaway.
The player is meant to question the Assassins' methods by design. The Assassins kill, but only when it will serve the greater good (seeking peace while preserving freedom). They don't just kill anyone who they think is evil--they specifically target warmongers and tyrants. A lot of the targets in the first game did terrible things as a means to establish order. When you kill them, many of your victims will voice concerns about what will happen to the people or causes they championed, now that they are gone. Some have no doubt that what they did was justified and have no regrets. The player is meant to question the morality of their own actions, since they, too, have committed atrocious deeds to achieve their own supposedly righteous ends. If anything, the game cheapens death when it makes the targets obviously evil and unsympathetic.
Giving the player the option to spare targets is an interesting idea, but not one that would necessarily work, given the way the AC games are structured. A big part of the games' draw is that they are set against a historical backdrop. A lot of the characters are historical figures whose fate is sealed. You couldn't spare their lives unless you invalidated history in the games. They could have the targets later die from natural causes, but that invalidates the player's choice to spare them. Even if the devs went with fictional characters and events, the devs would realistically have to consider how sparing characters would work in the world of the game. Would a choice carry on to later games in the series, like Mass Effect? The results of those kinds of choices are usually cosmetic to the game's resolution, anyway. Ultimately, the characters you kill are all involved with some pretty dubious activities, which would probably continue if you let them go. The whole point of the game is that some people won't be reasoned with and/ or are too dangerous or evil to simply ignore. Possibly they could create branching storylines for choosing to spare or kill targets, but that choice would ultimately be meaningless. Players would replay the game just to see how things might play out another way (if it changed the story). Inevitably, they would try for the "best" ending, which breaks the game entirely: in real life, you don't know what will happen as a result of your actions and you can't go back if you don't like the outcome. Giving players the illusion of choice in this instance frees them from the Assassins' dilemma of having to commit an immoral act to secure the peace, not knowing what the cost of inaction might be. The Assassins seek to gain wisdom in order to act wisely; there is no point in learning from mistakes if they can be undone so easily, or if you already know the exact outcome of your decisions.
@@ct000374910 I never said I wanted a system of choice, especially because I understand the importance of preserving historical autencity, though I understand why you mentioned it. Oh ! And I loved reading your comment, it defends perfectly what the saga stands for. I wished they had shown that respect back in "Assassin's Creed 2" and that they would restore it in the recent games. I mean, in "Odyssey" I can understand why they didn't do that with the Cult because the main story would be only the of begining Kassandra's story, in other words, the part in which she still sees the world black and white. The DLCs are the middle and ending of it. That's why I love "Odyssey" so much ! I just wished they had made a better job with "Fate of Atlantis".
i've read that almost all these templars are fictional because had real people been chosen descendants could have been offended
John Elliotson, James Brudenell and David Brewster were real people.
Starrick, Twopenny, Attaway and Ferris were fake though. Roth too.
@@carlosalegria4776 who is James Brudenell
@@Engille967 Earl of cardigan, participated in the Crimean war
@@carlosalegria4776 ok
Who gives a damn about what they're descendants think? There are so many and this story is a fictional setting. Honestly such people are so damn pitiful. Nothing redeeming about themselves so they anchor to an ancestor.
I think the latest "Spider-Man" movie is going to re-spark some of the Templar-Assassins discussions.
That said, who here is a Templar and agrees with Miguel ? Come my brothers. Let the Father of Understanding guide us the Light !Once Miles fails or accomplishes different results, the Assassins will finally see the realization all Templars are birthed from !
41:21 The city belongs to everyone ! And that includes its governeurs.
Ok, that's it! *Writes on some paper* I'm puttin' George on my Dumbasses in command list
Hey Sevvina, are you gonna do a video on Jack the Ripper?
That is the plan. I just haven't had time to play that DLC as of yet.
alright take your time
Seriously Henry? You compare Starrick with Birch? Seriously no haythem kenway?
Brandon Owyong, Well, Haytham wasn't the Grand Master of the British Rite like Birch.
He was a master templar, but not Grandmaster of the British rite. He was Grandmaster of the Colonial Rite, which later became the American Rite.
Think you can do one on the Rooks?
+Tomás Molina
I'm honestly not sure what I could put together for that. There are no prominent Rook characters besides Jacob and Evie. I was thinking of a video of just Jacob and Evie interactions, though.
+Sevvina Ah well in that case never mind.
Wait someone's missing is Maxwell Roth
+Danial janbuksh
Pretty sure he was just an associate, not an actual Templar.
Sevvina oh OK
defected
It mimics the original's presentation but is worse...
28:54 even though Twopenny is an idiot, he's not wrong here you know ? There are homeless people who make more of an effort than this one to at least look decent not in terms of clothes, but in terms of habits and form.
why are they wiping the blood?
I think it is a reference to the first Assassins Creed game. Altair Ibn Ahad, the protagonist of the first game, was given a white feather every time he was sent out to kill someone. After he did the deed, he would wipe the feather in the spilled blood of his target. He presented the bloodied feather to his mentor upon returning to the Assassins' stronghold in Masyaf. The sequels showed the other Assassins performing similar rituals with their targets. In this case, the protagonist apparently uses a white handkerchief to wipe the blood off the target's face/ neck as a sign of respect or remorse. I think the message meant by this is something like, "Sorry I killed you. It was nothing personal, it's just that the world is better with you removed from it. Now that it's all over, let me clean you up so you at least look nice for the wake." Remember, the Assassins acknowledge that while their actions are meant to bring peace and safeguard humanity from tyranny, they are still committing murder. The games force you to kill people to advance the plot, but ideally they should also make you think a bit about the justifications and consequences of your actions on the wider world.
I think its also a proof of death - Altair did it to show Al Mualim and the Frye's have the same approach
Templars are more iconic than assassins
The assasins are literally the poster boys wdym
Templars are evil
Danial janbuksh a new Order cannot begin without the destruction of the old.
Trey Williams what're you talking about
Daniel janbuksh he justifies their evil
yurich tube ok
Daniel janbuksh Yo mama