Support NeoGAF

[twobear]

And are you really gonna tell me that modeling, rigging, creating new animation cycles, motion capturing, recording audio, casting all takes one day? Also, he also specifically stated that it would result in lower quality. And by lower quality. He means this
https://imgflip.com/gif/9jjgr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ye0Rl16elKo
Yea ok. I definitely want lower quality. Yea that's what I wanna spend money on. Ծ_Ծ

The bug with Avelline happens occasionally in every AC game, so it's nothing to do with the fact that they added a female MC.

I will take the word of the lead animator of an Assassins Creed game about how much effort animating a character for a new Assassins Creed game will take over yours, sorry.

 

[Kuldar]

Based on the tight timeline and the fact that they dropped competitive multiplay in order to get the game done? Considering those two facts I don't think so.

Why do you think they dropped the competitive multiplayer in order to get the game done it time?
It's a serious question, I didn't read every interview about AC Unity, I may have miss this information.

 

[stupei]

Well you seem to be making assumptions about what Crossing Eden does or does not care about there and I have no reason to get into your attempt at reading his or her mind.

The fact that they are working to incredibly tight deadline does colour the whole conversation as does the fact that (unlike for example TF2) we are talking about a projection of an avatar into a seamless single player campaign with a defined lead that never changes for each person playing the game.

I haven't made any assumptions about what Crossing Eden does or does not care about. They have posted several times in this very thread that adding in female representation would only be for appearance or looks and that it would be time wasted that could be better spent on more important things. They've also highlighted the importance of the animation. So... everything I said was in fact based on things they have said.

But I could see how you might have missed some of that since you seem to have mixed me up with AyaisMUsikWhore. Just because someone pointed out how annoying it is when someone picks one line to respond to instead of an entire post, that doesn't make them the users you originally responded to.

But again: you don't seem to be reading this thread very thoroughly, perhaps because you're in such a rush to respond to as many people as possible, so I can see how you might have gotten mixed up.

 

[Karkador]

I definitely want lower quality. Yea that's what I wanna spend money on. Ծ_Ծ

It's a rushed yearly game. You're already settling for compromise.
But I guess that's okay when it's meeting your status quo

 

[Azih]

Why do you think they dropped the competitive multiplayer in order to get the game done it time?

Because the deadline is crazy tight?

 

[APF]

I don't think they've half assed the drop in co-op based on this issue. I think they did the bare minimum in order to get the feature done and some form of multiplay achieved by their deadline.

Uh, how much less would they have needed to do to qualify for "half-assing" the feature then? You literally can't do less than the bare minimum.

recording audio, casting all takes one day?

Wait, your co-op partners now have separate audio tracks? And they're all the same voice?

 

[Crossing Eden]

The bug with Avelline happens occasionally in every AC game, so it's nothing to do with the fact that they added a female MC.

I will take the word of the lead animator of an Assassins Creed game about how much effort animating a character for a new Assassins Creed game will take over yours, sorry.

It has to do with the fact that they reskinned the animations of a buff native american male onto a slim African/french woman. It doesn't look natural at all. Reskinning in any game rarely ever looks natural unless a significant amount of time is dedicated to it. And if you're taking the word of Jonathan Cooper than don't ignore the fact that he stated that it results in lower quality.

 

[Crossing Eden]

It's a rushed yearly game. You're already settling for compromise.
But I guess that's okay when it's meeting your status quo

I don't consider three+ years of development of time to be rushed. They don't make this in a year, especially not this game. You can obviously see where the effort and resources went.

 

[APF]

But production costs didn't have anything to do with it, right? Or does it have something to do with it now?

 

[Kuldar]

Because the deadline is crazy tight?

Is there any official or leaked informations that say it's the reason?

The competitive multiplayer is not a core part of the AC franchise. It's an addition made during AC:Brotherhood and that got little innovations in the 3 following games. Maybe they felt that it was time to drop it and to do something else.
The fact that they didn't have to spend time on it may be a bonus, not the reason.

 

[Zoe]

Wait, your co-op partners now have separate audio tracks? And they're all the same voice?

Yes, they said it would require "double the voices".

 

[Orayn]

But production costs didn't have anything to do with it, right? Or does it have something to do with it now?

Ubi said the animations alone would be prohibitively time-consuming. There was an animator of some major games, including AssCreed III, who disputed that claim and said it would take a day or two at most.

The other component was all the costumes available to Arno/generic male co-op pals.

 

[APF]

Yes, they said it would require "double the voices".

Doesn't that seem weird? So now you have four clones all with the same voice but with different faces talking to each other?

Ubi said the animations alone would be prohibitively time-consuming.

But they also said that production costs were not an issue.

 

[Zoe]

Doesn't that seem weird? So now you have four clones all with the same voice but with different faces talking to each other?

They could already have multiple male voices, but for equality they would need the same number of female voices.

 

[twobear]

It has to do with the fact that they reskinned the animations of a buff native american male onto a slim African/french woman. It doesn't look natural at all. Reskinning in any game rarely ever looks natural unless a significant amount of time is dedicated to it. And if you're taking the word of Jonathan Cooper than don't ignore the fact that he stated that it results in lower quality.

What are you talking about? The bug in the first gif is that she is standing some way distant of her target? That happens in AC4, too. Other than that I don't see anything about the animation that's particularly wrong?

And where did he state that it results in lower quality? Is it on Twitter? Because I don't see it.

 

[MYeager]

It's a rushed yearly game. You're already settling for compromise.
But I guess that's okay when it's meeting your status quo

That's an odd statement, of course their okay with a game when it meets their status quo. Do you often buy games that don't meet your own internal status quo? What's wrong with saying that you'd rather it not be rushed or saying this is one yearly compromise too many?

 

[Sianos]

If a game doesn't have a certain feature because the devs are working on tons of other features then it's quite self entitled to push for one feature that may or may not affect the game in a positive way and may hinder the development and refinement of other features. And there's no sexism in the notion that working on a female playable character in a game with a male lead may hinder development. Just it's not sexist to say that games like Tomb Raider don't have playable men during development. What if during production they planned to let you play as Lara's dad but decided to drop it to get a more focused product and spend resources elsewhere. That's not sexist or done with malicious intent. It's just something that happens.

They'd have this high quality bar they want to reach. To reach that they have to polish and refine many aspects of this new game that was built from the ground up. Crowd tech, buildings, etc. And yes, sometimes developing a different character model can hinder that. And it would be the same if it was vice versa. The "little gain" comes from the fact that the player never sees themselves as anyone other than the MC. And none of his movements seem feminine or like somethings a female assassin would do in a grounded setting like the one for this game.

They care about making a polished next gen game. First and foremost. That's their and pretty much every team's priority. And guess what. Making a playable female character=a less polished version of AC:Unity. Sorry. That's just the way it works in this specific context with this specific next gen game.

Replace the phrase "female playable character" with the word "second playable character with unique animation sets that are just as refined as the MC." Working on that tech would result in a less polished version of AC:Unity.

Now replace the previous phrase with "boat." Working on a boat would result in a less polished version of AC:Unity. The pattern is that things that are unnecessary hinders the development and vision of the game the team wants to create. Period. That happens with any game, or any project.

Wow, it really demonstrates your... particular mindset when you compare gender inclusiveness to prop design. Really shows what you consider women to be.

Is your logic really that adding a woman co-op character to AC:Unity would result in a less polished game? The issue here is that you are valuing just the vague concept of "polish" over gender inclusiveness, and when faced with the fact that whatever work is done in the female co-op protagonist can then be used to "polish" up existing NPC female assassins in the game you seem to resort to fallacy and flat out ignoring or misconstruing logic.

It is your attitude that is the problem, and by you increasingly demonstrating this attitude I hope the gaming community at large will see the fallacies behind it.

 

[Karkador]

What are you talking about? The bug in the first gif is that she is standing some way distant of her target? That happens in AC4, too. Other than that I don't see anything about the animation that's particularly wrong?

And where did he state that it results in lower quality? Is it on Twitter? Because I don't see it.

He posted that gif to show that male animation looks silly when translated onto a female model, but what's silly is how he tries to make an argument for these things being about maintaining game quality (and he is very clearly a fan of the games and thinks they are the bomb) while ignoring actual quality issues and bugs the games have.

That's an odd statement, of course their okay with a game when it meets their status quo. Do you often buy games that don't meet your own internal status quo? What's wrong with saying that you'd rather it not be rushed or saying this is one yearly compromise too many?

Because it's acting like only your status quo matters. He keeps asserting that only some things matter, not these other things, and completely dismisses that it's not that way for other people, and they are allowed to express criticism about it.

Saying you'd "rather it not be rushed" comes off as being incredibly disingenuous, when it's pretty clear that these games are rushed.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

p4r is the best, lol.

When video games start having good female characters in games, video game publishers will be as shocked by the response as the Marvel producers were when Black Widow became super popular.

 

[Crossing Eden]

What are you talking about? The bug in the first gif is that she is standing some way distant of her target? That happens in AC4, too. Other than that I don't see anything about the animation that's particularly wrong?

And where did he state that it results in lower quality? Is it on Twitter? Because I don't see it.

He states on polygon that
"It's not the best quality," Cooper concluded. "It's definitely a compromise in quality"
That's not good. Yes, you notice that the animation quirks happen in both ACL, (more so than AC4 because Edward has more original animations than Aveline) and AC4. That's part of the reason why they don't wanna do it in this game specifically. And it still doesn't look as natural as it does on Connor, because it was made for character. Aveline's animations are super janky even for an assassin's creed game.

 

[Experien]

This is cool that people are pointing out Ubisoft's missteps but how about you take it one step further and NOT BUY THE GAMES?

Complaining about it and buying the games behind these issues just seems contradictory.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Wow, it really demonstrates your... particular mindset when you compare gender inclusiveness to prop design. Really shows what you consider women to be.

Is your logic really that adding a woman co-op character to AC:Unity would result in a less polished game? The issue here is that you are valuing just the vague concept of "polish" over gender inclusiveness, and when faced with the fact that whatever work is done in the female co-op protagonist can then be used to "polish" up existing NPC female assassins in the game you seem to resort to fallacy and flat out ignoring or misconstruing logic.

It is your attitude that is the problem, and by you increasingly demonstrating this attitude I hope the gaming community at large will see the fallacies behind it.

1.No it does not reflect my views whatsoever on women in video games whatsoever. I just know how product development works so how dare you.
2.What are you basing the notion that "whatever work is done in the female co-op protagonist can then be used to "polish" up existing NPC female assassins" on? What about other aspects of the game? What about the framerate? The crowd AI? The combat animations? The parkour animations? It's not just about the female assassins in the game.

 

[Crossing Eden]

This is cool that people are pointing out Ubisoft's missteps but how about you take it one step further and NOT BUY THE GAMES?

Complaining about it and buying the games behind these issues just seems contradictory.

Or take it one step further and buy liberation HD since they seem to care about playing as a female assassin so much but are super quick to dismiss that game as a viable option.

 

[Karkador]

This is cool that people are pointing out Ubisoft's missteps but how about you take it one step further and NOT BUY THE GAMES?

Complaining about it and buying the games behind these issues just seems contradictory.

So stop playing videogames, basically? And then when the marketing data shows less diversity in the types of people playing games, it's just that videogames are only interesting to one type of person?

 

[stufte]

Or take it one step further and buy liberation HD since they seem to care about playing as a female assassin so much but are super quick to dismiss that game as a viable option.

This. Vote with your wallets? Arguing on twitter and here will only go so far. Buy a game from them with a female lead. If they see enough interest in another female lead they'll make one. Or be more proactive than angry and open a dialog with them for inclusion in the next game, since it's not like they don't make an asscreed game every year...

 

[Orayn]

This. Vote with your wallets? Arguing on twitter and here will only go so far. Buy a game from them with a female lead. If they see enough interest in another female lead they'll make one. Or be more proactive than angry and open a dialog with them for inclusion in the next game, since it's not like they don't make an asscreed game every year...

Pretty sure that's an implicit part of what's going on right now. Ubi should probably pick up on it, unless of course they decide to act incredible dense and come out saying something like "Oh, you wanted female playable characters in general for the AssCreed series? We thought you were only talking about Unity and had zero interest in their inclusion in any other game ever."

 

[Sianos]

1.No it does not reflect my views whatsoever on women in video games whatsoever. I just know how product development works so how dare you.
2.What are you basing the notion that "whatever work is done in the female co-op protagonist can then be used to "polish" up existing NPC female assassins" on? What about other aspects of the game? What about the framerate? The crowd AI? The combat animations? The parkour animations? It's not just about the female assassins in the game.

I'm going to base your view on women by quoting things you've said throughout the thread, of course.

In the context of AC:Unity and the seamless co-op what does a female character add besides something aesthetically pleasing?

Replace the phrase "female playable character" with the word "second playable character with unique animation sets that are just as refined as the MC." Working on that tech would result in a less polished version of AC:Unity.

Now replace the previous phrase with "boat." Working on a boat would result in a less polished version of AC:Unity. The pattern is that things that are unnecessary hinders the development and vision of the game the team wants to create. Period. That happens with any game, or any project.

And quite frankly, female character animation was not a priority because it conflicts with other more important aspects of development. That's not an issue. At all. A clear focus and a pipeline that isn't hindered by something arbitrary and unnecessary results in a better product. Period. It always has, not just with games but any project.

It is this opinion that gender inclusiveness is a low priority, one so low that whatever effort is done for it with make the game worse for it (as if adding a female co-op character adds no value to the game) that I find fault with.

And on another note, yes, animations used on a female co-op character based off of the frame of a female assassin NPC could be used for that original NPC for things such as "The combat animations? The parkour animations?", things that are apparently much more important than gender inclusiveness. So then everyone wins, and I've managed to minimize work for Ubisoft.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Pretty sure that's an implicit part of what's going on right now. Ubi should probably pick up on it, unless of course they decide to act incredible dense and comes out saying something like "Oh, you wanted female playable characters in general for the AssCreed? We thought you were only talking about Unity."

Well the majority of the fanbase isn't clamoring for another female assassin. The majority of them didn't look at the gameplay reveal: "oh wow, so lame ubi, no female assassin."

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

Whilst it might be a passing storm, I imagine Ubisoft take a degree of satisfaction that their game franchise has a high enough profile that a storm surrounds it in the first place.

It does seem a little disingenuous for a game franchise that, against its peers, does pretty well when it comes to inclusiveness, that all past efforts appear to have been entirely overlooked by many of those (clarification: mostly outside of pure gaming communities) taking up arms about AC:U's lack of female representation.

And, no doubt, the response out of Ubi was poorly judged and has added fuel to the fire.

But when I see a hashtag mobilised that reads #womenaretoohardtoanimate I have to ask myself "When did anyone say they were too hard to animate"? The point seems a little lost when the one you're rallying/tweeting against isn't quite what was the issue in the first place.

Anyway, I think UC: Liberty definitely has some relevance on this.

If I were Ubi, going stone-cold business-like, I'd do a re-release of UC: Liberty and push it onto the market pretty quick. Tick that box. Make some sincere-sounding statement. Sell some product.

My guess is that new AC games have a development period of 2 years or so, so I wouldn't expect to see too much single-player/narrative/character change in AC until a couple of yearly sequels away. In the meantime, they'll probably plop multiplayer back in for the next iteration and say they've put female assassins back into the franchise.

In summary: both sides of the argument seem to have their inaccuracies but Ubisoft will probably find a way to profit from this fuss.

 

[Kuldar]

Pretty sure that's an implicit part of what's going on right now. Ubi should probably pick up on it, unless of course they decide to act incredible dense and come out saying something like "Oh, you wanted female playable characters in general for the AssCreed series? We thought you were only talking about Unity and had zero interest in their inclusion in any other game ever."

For the next AC it's probably too late. AC games are made in three years, so for the AC that will be released next year, they are already in the second year of developpement. The setting and the main prortagonist are already decided. For the one coming in two years, yeah we may have an influence on their choice.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I'm going to base your view on women by quoting things you've said throughout the thread, of course. It is this opinion that gender inclusiveness is a low priority, one so low that whatever effort is done for it with make the game worse for it (as if adding a female co-op character adds no value to the game) that I find fault with.

And on another note, yes, animations used on a female co-op character based off of the frame of a female assassin NPC could be used for that original NPC for things such as "The combat animations? The parkour animations?", things that are apparently much more important than gender inclusiveness. So then everyone wins, and I've managed to minimize work for Ubisoft.

I was talking about this game. And adding a female co-op literally doesn't add any value to the game when the resources are spent elsewhere and they choose to do an easier seamless co-op route. Gender inclusiveness is not a priority of this series. And that's ok. It shouldn't fall on Ubisoft, who has already made multiple female protagonists including important characters in the lore being female and also having multiple series that feature a female character to prioritize gender inclusiveness over other aspects of a game where the player plays as a male at all times. You may disagree, but then again you've never been part of a team that has to consider these things, you've never had to make a simple animation. Also, take into account that i've been speaking in the context of this game only. Not gaming as a whole. So no it does not reflect my views on any other series or even other AC games aside from passing mentions.

 

[Orayn]

Well the majority of the fanbase isn't clamoring for another female assassin. The majority of them didn't look at the gameplay reveal: "oh wow, so lame ubi, no female assassin."

Does the majority have to complain about something for it to be worth taking into consideration? The majority would give Ubisoft a pass on some pretty fucked up things, doesn't mean Ubi should just go ahead and throw them in because under 50% of customers would raise concerns. Plenty of games have options like inverted aiming or a colorblind UI for far less than that.

 

[stufte]

I'm going to base your view on women by quoting things you've said throughout the thread, of course.







It is this opinion that gender inclusiveness is a low priority, one so low that whatever effort is done for it with make the game worse for it (as if adding a female co-op character adds no value to the game) that I find fault with.

And on another note, yes, animations used on a female co-op character based off of the frame of a female assassin NPC could be used for that original NPC for things such as "The combat animations? The parkour animations?", things that are apparently much more important than gender inclusiveness. So then everyone wins, and I've managed to minimize work for Ubisoft.

So in creating assets for a game, a female asset may take as long as a pirate ship, which may be more important to the game. This is an actual thing. The characters aren't real people. they're props in a game, something to drive a story. Someone painted a 3d mesh to look like a human female, it's not a real female. And the time it took to make that 3d mesh/texture/animations/etc, may stand in the way of making a pirate ship, which may be more needed.

Now this is completely hypothetical, but my point is that it's a game. the males and females are 3d props just like the boats, and your character assassination of this other forum poster because he/she is trying to explain the logistics of game development to you is sad.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Does the majority have to complain about something for it to be worth taking into consideration? The majority would give Ubisoft a pass on some pretty fucked up things, doesn't mean Ubi should just go ahead and throw them in because under 50% of customers would raise concerns. Plenty of games have options like inverted aiming or a colorblind UI for far less than that.

They kinda do. Yes. As we've seen before forum complaints and twitter hashtags don't have much weight or speak as loudly as plain and simple sales and good reception from reviews. Case and Point:Watch Dogs. People could spend months complaining that we don't play as a female in this game but I very much doubt that they would make much of a difference. Less so considering that they're targeting a company known for it's diversity.

 

[Karkador]

I was talking about this game. And adding a female co-op literally doesn't add any value to the game when the resources are spent elsewhere and they choose to do an easier seamless co-op route.

Doesn't add any value to the game TO YOU

Gender inclusiveness is not a priority of this series. And that's ok. It shouldn't fall on Ubisoft, who has already made multiple female protagonists including important characters in the lore being female and also having multiple series that feature a female character to prioritize gender inclusiveness over other aspects of a game where the player plays as a male at all times.

You cannot say "gender inclusivity is not a priority of this series" and then claim all these nice things they've done for gender inclusivity. You're contradicting yourself.

You may disagree, but then again you've never been part of a team that has to consider these things, you've never had to make a simple animation.

Stop being condescending about this.

 

[APF]

They could already have multiple male voices, but for equality they would need the same number of female voices.

I think it's likely they also have women in the game however. I guess we'll see, but I think their messaging has confused the issue more than it's clarified it.

 

[Crossing Eden]

So in creating assets for a game, a female asset may take as long as a pirate ship, which may be more important to the game. This is an actual thing. The characters aren't real people. they're props in a game, something to drive a story. Someone painted a 3d mesh to look like a human female, it's not a real female. And the time it took to make that 3d mesh/texture/animations/etc, may stand in the way of making a pirate ship, which may be more needed.

Now this is completely hypothetical, but my point is that it's a game. the males and females are 3d props just like the boats, and your character assassination of this other forum poster because he/she is trying to explain the logistics of game development to you is sad.

Thank you. That's exactly what I was saying.

 

[Zoe]

I think it's likely they also have women in the game however. I guess we'll see, but I think their messaging has confused the issue more than it's clarified it.

They do:

We had very strong voices on the team pushing for that and I really wanted to do it, we just couldn't squeeze it in in time. But on the other hand we managed to get more of the other story characters to be women.

 

[APF]

They do:

So then we're back to casting and voice acting not really being a good excuse.

 

[Zoe]

So then we're back to casting and voice acting not really being a good excuse.

Not if those were characters that were going to exist regardless.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

Well the majority of the fanbase isn't clamoring for another female assassin. The majority of them didn't look at the gameplay reveal: "oh wow, so lame ubi, no female assassin."

This is becoming ridiculous! So I must buy a game I already have, that isn't even on a next gen systems, to enjoy AC - that is ridden with bugs they they didn't bother to fix because it's not important?

You are so sure this game will be everything all because of some animation that really does nothing to help the game if the rest of it is shit, including the story, including npc interaction, including gameplay, including all these extra resources that hasn't put AC above any games that are "more polished" and more memorable than this.

It's becoming really insulting the you continue to make it seem that the criticism of developers are far worse than seeing the game in a perspective of a women. Then to claim that any type of interaction that may have involved a women would be low quality and subliminally adding that it's not worth the cost to even change a dynamic of a game that could of offered a female character as a mirror to the main character you play as.

You have constantly tried to fight any notion that even to say ubisoft should be held accountable for their "excuse" is wrong by using productions as an entire excuse when adding another gender has never been something they haven't done.

You claim to be a "feminist" but can't even take one minute out of your perspective just to see that maybe it would have been cool. Maybe it could open the doors to a better plot line? Maybe that at the beginning of the production when they did consider her that it would have changed how the game could of went as we have had 5+ series from the perspective of a guy?

IIt shouldn't take 30 pages for you to understand that people don't want a female assassin as a lead and aren't debating on whether the game should be changed now. But instead, just off the share imagination, that they could of and it still wouldn't have been a bad thing to even try the risk for, but would appreciate if we weren't considered a waste of time and resources?

I find it even just more insulting that this all comes down to "You are not a developer so you shouldn't talk about anything. You shouldn't question anything. You don't know how hard it is. So your point and every other point against this is irrelevant."

That shouldn't even be a tone that this conversion should have in the first place. Many of us can agree to disagree. We can come to a compromise, but there seems to be none in this thread no matter how challenging every valid argument is.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Doesn't add any value to the game TO YOU



You cannot say "gender inclusivity is not a priority of this series" and then claim all these nice things they've done for gender inclusivity. You're contradicting yourself.

I know many female fans of this series. Females who love Ezio more than Aveline or Aveline more than Connor or Edward more so than Haytham. Based on just the interactions and how long i've been a fan of this series I can definitely say that the majority of female AC fans would not find any value in the phrase. "Oh you always play as Arno but sometimes others players see you as a girl in their game, how awesome is that? That adds alot to the game right??" No. That's not how the fanbase of this series works in anyway shape or form aside from a loud minority. Also, YES, you can claim that gender inclusivity is not a priority of this series because it never has been, it never was implied to be, and the developers never stated that it was a major priority in the series, but it's also wrong and disrespectful to many talented developers to ignore the times that this series has shown it's diversity and representation of women. It shows that the developers are not afraid of doing it. Just like it's wrong and disrespectful to complain about us playing as a white male in a series known for having many playable characters of many different ethnicities, backgrounds, and heritages.

 

[Experien]

So stop playing videogames, basically? And then when the marketing data shows less diversity in the types of people playing games, it's just that videogames are only interesting to one type of person?

there is a difference between stop playing video games and throwing a beef over one dev and yet blindlessly buy their games. I'm saying, if you are going to call them out, you shouldn't still buy the product.

 

[Crossing Eden]

This is becoming ridiculous! So I must buy a game I already have, that isn't even on a next gen systems, to enjoy AC - that is ridden with bugs they they didn't bother to fix because it's not important?

You are so sure this game will be everything all because of some animation that really does nothing to help the game if the rest of it is shit, including the story, including npc interaction, including gameplay, including all these extra resources that hasn't put AC above any games that are "more polished" and more memorable than this.

No aspect of what they've shown so far of this game has been "shit." And yes, if you're so desperate for a female assassin than there are many alternatives in the same series that give you that option but it's not fair to say "oh but I want it in this one, that's not fair to me." Because now you're valuing the needs of yourself over the needs of others while also showing how little you know about game development while also being rude by saying "oh well they should've just changed the game to suit my needs in the name of representation." So basically you're entire argument now is that the "game will be shit, including the story, including npc interaction, including gameplay" or that it might possibly when shit when none of what they've shown so far has implied that in anyway shape or form. A thought that I can almost guarantee would've never crossed your mind if they showed off a female assassin with the same gameplay concepts.

 

[Moozo]

Given that in 7 years and nearly as many iterations of the game they still haven't replaced some of the awful and dated animations from the first Assassin's Creed it's unreasonable to expect them to do it all for a female model as well

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

there is a difference between stop playing video games and throwing a beef over one dev and yet blindlessly buy their games. I'm saying, if you are going to call them out, you shouldn't still buy the product.

Yes, because the minority already being misrepresented in games, who can't even get hired enough to make a game, who are discouraged from making games because of fears their gender or presence in the gaming industry is not of open standards - are the ones who are totally strong enough to stop the millions of people who don't care enough about issues the gaming industry continues to build on, from buying the game. Totally.

 

[MYeager]

Because it's acting like only your status quo matters. He keeps asserting that only some things matter, not these other things, and completely dismisses that it's not that way for other people, and they are allowed to express criticism about it.

Saying you'd "rather it not be rushed" comes off as being incredibly disingenuous, when it's pretty clear that these games are rushed.

Ah, well yeah, if it doesn't match someone else's status quo then I wouldn't be surprised if they were critical.

For the latter part of your post, how is that disingenuous? If my problem is that the yearly cycle is leading to diminishing returns for the series and that I'd rather it have the time they need then rushing it just to have a AC game out this year (much less two) I mean it sincerely. As I said in this thread already, while I understand they're trying to make their stock holders happy, there's a point where it can be damaging to a series to just keep cranking out yearly releases.

 

[cormack12]

The funny thing is that from the initial reveals/leaks people were suggesting it was a woman from the movement and also

Spoiler

James Kidd

in Black Flag is specifically disguised as a man most of the game, if not all that I can remember.

I don't think it would be that much of an issue but when you're deliberately flouting such features as entirely customisable assassins then you have to deliver on that. Personally it doesn't affect me at all or bother me but options and customisations are always good.

 

[APF]

Not if those were characters that were going to exist regardless.

I'm not following; doesn't that just support the argument that casting and voice acting isn't an issue?

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

No aspect of what they've shown so far of this game has been "shit." And yes, if you're so desperate for a female assassin than there are many alternatives in the same series that give you that option but it's not fair to say "oh but I want it in this one, that's not fair to me." Because now you're valuing the needs of yourself over the needs of others while also showing how little you know about game development while also being rude by saying "oh well they should've just changed the game to suit my needs in the name of representation." So basically you're entire argument now is that the "game will be shit, including the story, including npc interaction, including gameplay" or that it might possibly when shit when none of what they've shown so far has implied that in anyway shape or form. A thought that I can almost guarantee would've never crossed your mind if they showed off a female assassin with the same gameplay concepts.

Let me re-quote myself one more time since you continue to read what you want to read

IIt shouldn't take 30 pages for you to understand that people don't want a female assassin as a lead and aren't debating on whether the game should be changed now. But instead, just off the share imagination, that they could of and it still wouldn't have been a bad thing to even try the risk for, but would appreciate if we weren't considered a waste of time and resources?

I find it even just more insulting that this all comes down to "You are not a developer so you shouldn't talk about anything. You shouldn't question anything. You don't know how hard it is. So your point and every other point against this is irrelevant."

That shouldn't even be a tone that this conversion should have in the first place. Many of us can agree to disagree. We can come to a compromise, but there seems to be none in this thread no matter how challenging every valid argument is.

IIt shouldn't take 30 pages for you to understand that people don't want a female assassin as a lead and aren't debating on whether the game should be changed now. But instead, just off the share imagination, that they could of and it still wouldn't have been a bad thing to even try the risk for, but would appreciate if we weren't considered a waste of time and resources?

IIt shouldn't take 30 pages for you to understand that people don't want a female assassin as a lead and aren't debating on whether the game should be changed now. But instead, just off the share imagination, that they could of and it still wouldn't have been a bad thing to even try the risk for, but would appreciate if we weren't considered a waste of time and resources?

So you can see it again and again and again. No one on this entire thread has asked Ubisoft to change anything right now. No one has said that their needs, needs to be put first in front of others. That is the only thing YOU care about.

And you have persisted in this thread to continue to not address the concerns of those who would have liked the idea but instead resorted to excuses such AS,"Play another game. "

Not even UBISOFT is dumb enough to even suggest that but here you are.