Assassin's Creed

How do you mean it was devastated by slavery?

In Roman historical-economic terms, this is a transitional time for Egypt in a way that the game is utterly misleading about. For one, basically making the Roman and Greece thing remotely equivalent when it is the zenith of Egypt as a power and slowly becoming economically as well as militarily subservient to Rome.

One of the things that happened during this time as the economic collapse of Egypt was the massive rise in slave trading as well as slavery in the final era of it as an independent power. Basically, it was rapidly expanding as an industry during this time and slave markets would be as ubiquitous to anyone in this time as the railroad in a Wild West film.

This would be devastating to Egyptian culture and lives well beyond what had previously existed. Part of this being avoided previously was that earlier Ptolemic rulers had actually imposed economic sanctions and slave holding limits on the public to keep it from growing out of control that were removed.

It's not a change of kind but scale so historians kind of gloss over it but it is notable.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on May 1st 2021 at 5:44:15 AM

But why was slavery devastating to their culture?

It was a major contributing factor the collapse of traditional Egyptian culture but I admit it was over a course of a few centuries.

Didn't that have more to do with the Persian and Greek conquests and Greek colonization of Egypt for 500 years? I'm not seeing how slavery specifically would contribute more this than those factors.

I'm just reporting what I was taught that it had resulted in massive loss of populations, shifting in the economy, and a decay of the overall structure of society. Rome itself also collapsed because all of its work shifted to slaves and thus mass poverty and unrest shattered it.

But hey, either way, there's not much slavery in Origins.

I think the massive loss of population had more to do with the Bronze Age Collapse, as well as the economy collapsing because it was a rigid top down structure that collapsed once the top of the structure collapsed.

It sounds like what you learned was trying to reduce all those changes to one cause, slavery, which is rather oversimplified.

I thought Egypt was the civilization that handled the bronze age collapse the best since they managed to drive back the sea people.

They did, but they still had internal problems from it. They survived, but it was still quite painful.

Do you think that a certain recent samurai game killed any chance of a AC game in Feudal Japan?

Probably not, they’ll most likely just crib off it like they did Zelda and Witcher.

Memories already did the Sengoku period so that feels unlikely.

So someone went to the trouble of getting the Vinland dialogue translated.

The Ireland DLC is out, and History Respawned did a video on it:

Somebody "fixed" the DLC's title.◊

Edited by DrunkenNordmann on May 15th 2021 at 2:24:06 PM

Apparently the DLC has you set up yet another wannabe king with yet another petty kingdom to ally with Eivor.

Remember those side missions in Revelations where you put your assassins in conquered strongholds, and you do side missions for them to level them up to max and lock that stronghold? You don't? I don't blame you. But that sort of missions seems to be the main mission structure in Valhalla, writ large.

Wait, when did Kassandra put down a slave rebellion? The farthest I've gotten in Odyssey is Sparta.

In Sparta, actually. One mission asks you to put down a Helot rebellion. You can choose to help the rebels, but it will mean missing out on the best ending.

It's also somewhat of a throwaway mission, to be honest. There are several better missions dealing with slavery elsewhere int he game.

Is that the one where you have to take out a corrupt Krptyea?

Edited by SomeNewGuy on May 21st 2021 at 1:59:16 AM

About focusing much on history, I will said and issue I see with this games is that ubisoft saw the "being there, shape history" become more and more THE selling point rather than metaplot or animus nonesense so this become more and more a problem for ubisoft that is why they kill desmond and resolve juno subplot off screen, ubisoft dosent really want to finish the series but they cant just scrap it and said "here is the series, do was you want it".

I think the historical bits were always the selling point, though, even in the first game. That's what the Animus was for, after all.

Yeah, I'd rather have more historical tourism than cringy Pantheon stuff.

I hate the Isu but that's because they're a bunch of slaving assholes that impersonated gods. The metaplot is fascinating but it's not going anywhere. It's just, "lets get artifact A and keep it from the Templars."

But I can't say I'm here for the history because the history is usually so incredibly wrong. I'd prefer that they make no pretense of being the real thing.

Edited by CharlesPhipps on May 22nd 2021 at 4:16:28 AM

Personally, I think the Pantheon/Isu stuff is only cringy *because* they really don't try to develop it and the most we've gotten in recent years has been pretty token most of the time.

It's a cyclical problem. They don't develop it more than a token effort, so it's bad, so no one wants to see it continue, so it continues to be little more than a token plot thread.

AC 3 had actual story segments and combat in the real world. Something we could have expanded on with a "modern" version of cities to be explored simultaniously to the "ancient" versions. Maybe we have a big dramatic boss fight in a location we explored in the past earlier and know some environmental advantage to win the day or some other really cool concepts.

So just a lot of half-assing really.

I'm personally kinda lifting an eyebrow at the magic science not alien god folks even needing slaves. What, did nobody try robotics? It's not like they evolved alongside humanity, they straight up made humanity to be their slaves. Is there any AI rebellion in the lore or something?