Assassin’s Creed
It looks as though there is going to be some more Religion ‘bashing’ with Ubisoft’s release of ‘Assassin’s Creed.’ The game puts the player into the shoes of an Assassin who is out to regain his honor in the Secret Order of which he is apart. The storyline revolves around the Third Crusades, with your mission being to assassinate certain corrupt leaders on both the Saracen and Crusader sides who are using the war for their own profit. (Your mission also includes the Assassination of Corrupt Religious Fanatics.) The Templars are once again brought into play as hiding the ‘Secret Treasure.’ And yet another interesting aspect is that the game’s logo is none other than a compass looking symbol. 
Are they trying to once again imply a Masonic connection to the Crusading Orders? Asides from the exaggerations and ideas about the Knights Templar, the story is basically formed around the entire idea that removing ‘fantatical’ Crusaders is for the good of society. (Society being none other than the poor and oppressed who are suffering under the rule of the Corrupt and Fanatical Catholic Crusaders.) So when you get down to the point, ‘Assassin’s Creed’ is not much different than Ridley Scott’s horribly twisted 2005 Film, Kingdom of Heaven, which deliberately goes out of it’s way to put the Crusaders on the same level as Islamic Terrorists who are held captive by the shackles of religion. (Sarcasm Intended.)
The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://catholicdiscussion.wordpress.com/2007/12/07/assassins-creed/trackback/
Master Paul Xavier
Illustrious marceg
Miss Angela Rose
DUDE! That Game IS AWESOME!!!!
The gameplay is, but the historical references are twisted.
“Asides from the exaggerations and ideas about the Knights Templar, the story is basically formed around the entire idea that removing ‘fantatical’ Crusaders is for the good of society.”
Oh come on, haven’t you played past the opening trailer? You can’t “aside from” the Templars in this game, they ARE the game. While clearly using history as a malleable tool to tell their obviously fictional (and not a little sci-fi) story, the idea of removing fanatical Crusaders is NOT the entire idea behind the game. I don’t disagree that the concept of Altair’s mission, at it’s heart, is removing those labeled as fanatics and warmongers, but the targets are just as often Saladin’s supporters as they are Richard’s.
The presented history is screwy, the “main” character Desmond says as much near the middle of the game to help soften the blow to history enthusiasts who see truth being mangled to make a better story and a great game, but they never apologize for their “kill few to save many” message and that may be worth complaining over, but not in defense of the Crusaders. They are no more stereotyped than anyone else in the game.
I would have to agree with you rook…..If you want a Medeival game, there really are only two religions you can kill…..and notice how he didn’t kill the monks…
Lol, no, I haven’t played past the opening trailer. I have a N-64 and I sometimes play X-Box at my friends if I’m lucky. Technically I am aware that the Templars are the game, and am also aware that it is a work of fiction concerning the Crusades. Removing Fanatical Crusaders may not just be the main idea behind the game, but the idea of removing both Christians and Muslims alike follows along the line of portraying religion as a malicious entity which is used by the corrupt and powerful to manipulate the weak. Yes, there were corrupt people during the Crusades, on both sides of the desert, but the idea of portraying religious fanatics as those worthy of death can be a dangerous factor, especially since modern society is associating religion (Islam particularly) with death and destruction.
I can’t argue that you’ve got a good point there, but I will say (hopefully without spoiling any of the game) that it is the main character’s enemies who demean religion. They see religion as a tool for enslavement, and cover their tracks of corruption with fanaticism. Altiar is not freeing the people from the “dangerous bonds” religion, but (as he sees it anyway) freeing them from those who would abuse their faith. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the actions of a fictional assassin in a video game, but rather just trying to make the concept behind the plot itself less grotesque than you describe.
However, the equating a fervent faith with fanaticism, and in turn equating fanaticism with evil (or at least negativity) is more than prevalent in video games and any medium looking for a good “bad guy.” Who easier to make a villain than someone who believes too strongly in a cause? Part of me agrees with you: this is a dangerous factor; but another part of me believes that it is appropriate that heroes and villains alike are portrayed as people of vision and overwhelming character. Even “fanatics.” The apathetic have rarely, if ever, changed the world, and a good story should reflect that.
That’s a good poin, however, do they need to actually make it targeted on religion? Can’t it be targeted on a government or something? There is no reason for it, and it could have easialy been avoided. Therefore proving the fact that they want to target religion.
Rook,
I understand that the main enemies are the fanatics and those who use Religion as a means to undermine the people and cover their corruption. True, he may not be freeing them from Religion, but the idea of placing fanatics in charge and having them freed implies that Religious authority is to be question, due to the understanding that the authority may be corrupt. I may make it look grotesque, but the idea is simply that it portrays religion in a fanatical and corrupt sense. (Which is the becoming the modern view especially since, as I’ve mentioned, people associate religion with death and destruction. Particularly 9/11(Islam) and the Crusades. (Catholic Church.) ) I agree with you on the grounds of having a ‘good’ villain . Portraying him as someone who ‘firmly’ believes in his cause does add to his character, though I don’t believe that it was necessary to make him a corrupt fanatic. For example, couldn’t they make one of the men simply a corrupt noble who has his soldiers go around beating the people who fail to pay his grueling taxes? (without adding the equation of Religion behind his character.) To get down to my point, my argument is simply that the game doesn’t make use of the broad range of ideas which could be used, but rather focuses it’s story around corrupt fanatics, which, in the long run, attacks religion.
I have to agree this game is a smear campaign on the Templars right out of the Pope’s playbook. If everyone would simply adopt the ways of the Buddha no one would get killed.
How does adopting the ways of Buddha tie in with this? Death comes to us all…
Another way to promote hatred to the catholic church.
I’m just randomly looking through websites and then i found this one I realy want to now how you people feel about such historical accurences such as the spanish inquisition or the holucost