Yasuke is actually a fantastic choice as far as history/narrative goes.
A shame the game looks like more generic Assassin’s Creed Mapfucking+Crowd Supermurder.
Which is fine if that’s your thing, but I haven’t been thrilled by an AC game since… well, AC1.
I have 2 kinda conflicting opinions about the whole thing
The last AC game I’ve played is Brotherhood so it might all perfectly fit into the current AC universe idk.
I mean, I have trouble with the racism angle just because Yasuke is a famous historical figure who has shown up in media going back decades, if not centuries, who has very little known about him but was a part of some the biggest events to shape Japan. Nobunaga, his boss, is both one of the most famous and infamous people of Japanese history and constantly appears in Japanese media as either a hero or a villain. This makes Yasuke a perfect character for media set in the period, as he’s largely a blank slate outside of where he shows up in events around Nobunaga’s conquest of Japan.
I think around the time that they announced this game, there was also a movie being filmed about Yasuke, as well as a Netflix anime. I think the movie got canceled and the Netflix series turned into some Afro Samurai style thing, but that’s beside the point.
I haven’t played an AC game since the 5 hours I spent with Odyssey, but my understanding is that they threw away the larger narrative about the present day and now basically just use the tech from that plot as an excuse to let you play as historical or famous-adjacent figures in whatever time period setpiece that they want to use. One of my favorite Souls-like series, Nioh and Nioh 2, did something similar in the same time period, where in the first game you play as the British/Dutch sailor turned samurai, Anjin-san (literally Mr Pilot) in the first game, and a bastardized version of Toyotomi Hideyoshi, another famous samurai. Yasuke also shows up as a side character in both games.
Yasuke wasnt a samurai, and he was only documented in Japan for 3 years. Most of the myth behind him is unfounded. He was a kosho which is a servant. It is notable he was allowed to carry a short sword if he needed to defend his master, but he held no privileges that samurai did.
Its not known if he died in Japan or left, as his master was forced to commit seppeku and he then was captured. Its noted that he was not killed because he was deemed to be a “beast”, and in Japanese society back then it was considered shameful to kill a weaker enemy after capturing them.
I’m not sure where you got all of that stuff you wrote.
Yeah, I have the exact conflict about it.
I hate the pandering too but when I hear a breakdown from it and I hear “woke” and “DEI” and it makes me want to strangle that YT personality.
Can I interest you in a calm and respectful disembowelment of Ubisoft?
(edit) The video is nine minutes long.
YouSomeone downvoted me two minutes after I posted the link. You really only care about pushing the message, don’t you?oh I thought you said I specifically downvoted you and I was so confused.
It blows my mind that they had diversity consultants? Japan is like a huge part of the gaming industry the fact they really messed things up so bad is confusing. I figured they’d have a huge Japan division which would have been able to be like: “you know that’s wrong, right?” I like how he said the issue wasn’t diversity and that it was incompetency.
The end message is really important, I really needed to hear it.
I don’t know who the downvote came from, it just appeared suspiciously quickly. Apparently some people are trawling this thread for dissenting ideas that do not conform to the herd’s opinion.
I’m sure Ubisoft had some sort of consultants about cultural and historical matters, but their involvement in production of the game and marketing is dubious at best. It still fucks me up that anyone thought it was okay to use a destroyed cultural/religious object as marketing material, even without knowing its connection to the Allied bombings. I maintain my position that Ubisoft is exploiting these ideas callously and arrogantly and should not be given the benefit of doubt.