Assassins Creed 3 Could Have Made Us Care About Templars

Warning! This editorial is pretty much all spoilers for Assassin’s Creed 3. If you want your story experience with the game to remain intact, you should just leave right now. Go on.

----------------------------- ------------------------------- --------------------
When you fire up Assassin’s Creed 3 and first enter the Animus, the machine that transports you to the 1700s for the “past” portion of the game, you’re met with an interesting turn of events. Despite the fact that we’ve been hearing about the Native American hero of the game, Connor, for months, you start the game playing a white English dude by the name of Haytham Kenway.

As it turns out, you spend the entire first quarter of the game as Haytham, following him through assassination missions and freerunning as he searches for the temple that Desmond discovers in the beginning of the game. And then the big kicker comes — it turns out that Haytham is...

[Jinkies]

Totaly Agree

Haytham is amazing as a character who has more character development then Connor, I actually would of liked to play him over Connor.

<Spoilers>

I'm more ticked off though that they made him a Templar...what was the point of that. You have a great British Assassin, which makes sense considering the british coming over to America to liberate them from Templar control, meeting up with other British members in Boston and you think "Well maybe this game won't potray the British as the evil Templars....got to hand it to you Ubisoft I'm impressed"...THEN BOOM, he's a Templar, you find out that Templars ARE BACKING the red coats and most of the Templars in the game are British which leads up to Haytham being the big bad guy and typical Britian being the evil bad guys from a Hollywood film. I mean there was a total character change in personality with Charles Lee, from a loyal man to a horrible, souless monster when he pins young Connor to the wall, I mean I just feel Ubisoft did it on purpose, they knew if they did anything to put Americans in a negative light it could possibly ruin sales, even though it wouldn't because I bet Americans arn't actually bothered as long as it keeps in line with telling us what the past games told us about the Templars...but it fails and totaly twists the story around so they don't get upset and isn't all over FOX news.

Haytham could of been a great ally in the game or even main character but sadly Ubisoft messed up in my opinion. As I've said I'm half way through and nearly every enemy "Templar", the ones they said would be on BOTH sides are mostly all British.

http://www.officialplaystat...

http://www.computerandvideo...

[OneAboveAll]

Agree for the most part. I found the game more fun when playing as him. However I have to say that he's not a typical evil British bad guy from a Hollywood film because... back then they were actually the bad guys.

Which in return also makes America the bad guys to in the sense that we came from Britain too. (As well as from France, Germany, Sctoland and every other corner of the Earth)

[Jinkies]

Oh I didn't mean Haytham as a typical British bad guy I just meant the potray as British people in the game in general. We knew from past AC games that George Washington is a templar and the other founding fathers so why did they make him an ally for this game, he could of taken Haythams place while the people Haytham recuits could of been placed by the other founding fathers...hence why when they win the war it's a victory for the Templars and explains why Templars become bigger and end up controling most of America in the present.

Thing is back then no one was the bad guys, it wasn't like the world vs the Nazis when we knew they were evil, like pure evil, the British had things they believed in and the colonists had differnt views then them. Ubisoft said they wouldn't potray any side as evil and they did, it's not a big thing, the game is amazing but as a gamer I just don't like it when developers lie...no ones does, it would of been fine if they told the truth but they kept lying about it.

I'm really gutted we'll never get to play Haytham, I wouldn't mine a prequel with him but it's off putting since we know in the end he's turns bad, unless they do an alternative timeline like the Tyrant George Washington DLC, which effects future AC games.

[RivetCityGhoul]

the templars were never backing the red coats. haytham specifically said the templars do not fight for the crown. and another thing about this so called possibility of offense towards americans. listen i'm guessing you aren't from america all im gonna say is that any sort of discrepancy about this game would not have shown up on the news. frankly the people don't care about this stuff anymore. if the game had story based on something more current, then you would see it all over the news. like that six days in fallujah game that got hammered in the media or when EA had the opposing force in the multiplayer of MoH called the taliban. the media was all over it. and also another thing the british are not just portrayed as the bad guys in the game only. there was just as much instances of america being corrupt. for instance at the end of the epilogue mission where it shows americans trying to sell off african americans, or when conner is exposes george washington as hypocrite because he fights for freedom but yet he owns slaves etc. oh btw the americans were actually british you saying typical brits are the bad guys but yet the people fighting for freedom are also british. stop singling the british out as if they were fighting against some other race when the British & the American Colonists are one in the same.

[SAE]

I start feeling that im playing an assassin game after i started playing conor , i almost hated haytham , it just didnt felt right from the beginning , even the gameplay felt unbalanced when i was playing him , i guess each have his own opinion :)

But i liked him when i wasnt controling him ..

[Jinkies]

How could you not like Haytham, he was charming, cunning, kept his cool and was a great all rounded character, as I said it's a shame they made him the bad guy when they could of used the founding fathers instead. Him as an ally would of been amazing and they could of easily do side games with him as the character. They should of done that for the PSV Assassins Creed game instead.

The article is right about Connor, he's not as good as Ezio, he never listens, lets his hate get in the way, acts a bit like a brat when he dosent get his own way which leads to a killing rampage. I much prefer Haytham. I believe in development Haytham was going to be good but they changed him when they realised they didn't want to p*** off Americans by using people like the founding fathers as the enemies so they changed it around.

[SAE]

maybe i hated him because of the gameplay , i thought the gameplay was like that because of the bugs , i couldn't climb a tree , the movement was new so i wasn't comfortable to it at first , i saw some bugs that made me annoyed a little bit because all these things made me think it was a bugged game but the developers actually wanted this for the story , so when i controlled connor i felt this should be the right beginning for the gameplay (not the story) to make me understand what actually changed and the reason of the movement ...

[DigitalRaptor]

Could have*

[Blankman85]

Have!! For crying out loud it's could HAVE!! Would HAVE!! Should HAVE!! Must HAVE!! If you wanna shorten it then its could've NOT could of!

I apologise for my outburst, my rival soccer team is winning.

[Neo Nugget]

Come on. It's a common mistake! Could have. Could've. Could of.

Anyways, I really liked Hatham! That isn't to say I disliked everyone else, but compared to other baddies in the series he was surprisingly easy to warm up to.

[Pekolie]

".... Charles?"

I lol'd at that line :D

[Deku-Johnny]

Football!! For crying out loud it's football!!

[Rupee]

I kinda feel they did. The cutscenes during death made me feel a bit sympathetic toward them at times. The way they talked it made me feel like Connor was rushing into situations not fully understanding what was going on. I'm glad they brought back the longer death cutscenes.

Connor on the other hand... I had a hard time connecting to him as opposed to Ezio. It just seemed like he was always pissed at everyone, even potential allies. (like Achilles) It got annoying at times...

[SAE]

Thats perfect , thats what the develoPers want you feel about him , he is smart but sometimes he rush things without judging , he act depend on his feelings..

[Alos88]

That's the thing about AC stories, the morality is always so black and white, why can't we have a templar that does the wrong things for the right reasons, or an assassin who is downright sadistic in his methods?

[AzaziL]

It does seem like that's the case so far, the templars believe peace can only be achieved through control, the assassins believe in peace through freedom, two different idealogies with a common goal, just different means to achieve it.

[BlaqMagiq24]

Well said on that one