Ubisoft Apologizes for "Controversial" Relationship in Assassin’s Creed Odyssey DLC

These people are nuts. Do they get upset when matching a movie with a heterosexual relationship too?

I'm all for equality, and I believe everyone should have equal rights, but some people are just nuts about it.
 
So, people should actually LEARN why people are upset about Ubisoft's decision before getting their panties in a twist and acting all offended. Ubisoft marketed the fuck out of the concept of player choice for AC: O and a ton of that marketing was focused on allowing the player to decide exactly who their character (Alexios or Cassandra) would engage in romantic or sexual relations with. Ubisoft themselves heavily promoted that the player could make Alexios or Cassandra straight, gay, bi, or nonsexual by their own choices. Player choice was one of the primary pillars of the game's marketing and something Ubi talked about from the day the game was announced. So Ubisoft throwing that away for what sounds like a poorly told narrative reason is going to make people angry because Ubisoft specifically designed and marketed the game in a way that goes against removing that kind of agency from the player. If Alexios and Cassandra had been straight from the get go or if the main game didn't have romance options no one would give a damn.

the problem with all the LGBQT is that at some point it runs into reality. IE 2 gay man cant make a baby.
 
the problem with all the LGBQT is that at some point it runs into reality. IE 2 gay man cant make a baby.

Irrelevant. Ubi promised player agency and choice and stripped it away doing a poor job (reportedly) in the process. The context of the choices are entirely irrelevant. It was Ubisoft's job to honor the player's decisions or find a believable way to work around them. This is a game series dealing with a damn near godlike, hyper advanced, earlier civilization with tech that exceeds our modern time by hundreds, or thousands, of years. You want me to buy the excuse that they are unable to find a better solution than ham-fistedly shoving a straight relationship into a game built on player choice?
 
Irrelevant. Ubi promised player agency and choice and stripped it away doing a poor job (reportedly) in the process. The context of the choices are entirely irrelevant. It was Ubisoft's job to honor the player's decisions or find a believable way to work around them. This is a game series dealing with a damn near godlike, hyper advanced, earlier civilization with tech that exceeds our modern time by hundreds, or thousands, of years. You want me to buy the excuse that they are unable to find a better solution than ham-fistedly shoving a straight relationship into a game built on player choice?



How are babies made?

You are trying to deny reality.
 
You do realize it is possible, in 2019, for babies to be born without the genetic parents fucking, right?

Now, I've never played any games in the Assassins Creed series, but Wikipedia says this about Odyssey:

Wikipedia said:
The game is set in 431 BCE, four hundred years before the events of Assassin's Creed Origins. It recounts the secret fictional history of the Peloponnesian War, which was fought between the city-states of Greece.

(I thought they had something to do with revolutionary France, but I guess I was wrong)

Either way, neither the ancient Greeks nor the the revolutionary French had in-vitro fertilization technology.

Adoption/Surrogacy/Sperm donation could have been a possibility though.
 
Now, I've never played any games in the Assassins Creed series, but Wikipedia says this about Odyssey:



(I thought they had something to do with revolutionary France, but I guess I was wrong)

Either way, neither the ancient Greeks nor the the revolutionary French had in-vitro fertilization technology.

Adoption/Surrogacy/Sperm donation could have been a possibility though.

Read the entire discussion. I already addressed this in the previous reply. "This is a game series dealing with a damn near godlike, hyper advanced, earlier civilization with tech that exceeds our modern time by hundreds, or thousands, of years."
 
a random baby left on a doorstep would not be a bloodline, or fit the story of assassins creed


Right. But some of them are saying that the game shouldn't have forced the decision to have a baby upon the player. "What if I didn't want my character to have a kid!" or "They could have written the story so that the baby was randomly left on the doorstep."

I'll agree that it seems weird to offer the player a choice to go exclusively gay or lesbian in the main game only to force them into a hetero encounter in the DLC (if that's what's happening here) but the real turnoff for me is the manner in which many of those commenters reacted when people tried stating any opinions that didn't align 100% with the outrage. Some of the comments were so hostile and over-dramatic that it made me lose any sympathy that I might've otherwise had for those folks.
 
a random baby left on a doorstep would not be a bloodline

Right right I'm with you, but some of those people were saying that the bloodline thing hasn't been a requirement since AC4: Black Flag because something something Animus blah blah. Supposedly the distant relative/ancestor link was written out of the story in one of the newer games and that's why it shouldn't matter where the child comes from, according to them. But I don't know if that's accurate, as I've only played the AC series through III.
 
You'd think people could separate "play acting" from their real lives. I guess not. Maybe the government is right about video games "causing" bad stuff...

This trend is awful. "Play as you feel" is what I've been calling it. Your character has to look like you or anything you want (plot/setting be damned), act like you, think like you. Playing the real you would be pretty damn boring.

The point of a story based game is to create a plot that seems realistic or sensible. Joe-Bob isn't an assassin from hundreds of years ago. Putting Joe-Bob into the game as the main protagonist doesn't make sense. Play the game, get immersed into the story.

If you want to play your lame, boring life just go outside. You don't need a game for that.
 
Last edited:
The fascist SJWs have become anti-evolution like the Born Again Christians.

What a world!
 
Read the entire discussion. I already addressed this in the previous reply. "This is a game series dealing with a damn near godlike, hyper advanced, earlier civilization with tech that exceeds our modern time by hundreds, or thousands, of years."

Indeed quite right, as did I in my post. For those who are not Assassin's Creed fans and/or have played only a few titles, there are a few meta-narratives in the series. These are in addition to and tangential to the main "stuff happening in history" story of each game, such as the creation and evolution of the "Templar" and "Assassin" groups, their motivations, reasons for opposing each other etc. However, one of the "big" issues is... SPOILER INCOMING for anyone who hasn't played Assassin's Creed 2 to completion and/or later titles in the series.

There is a hyper advanced, superhuman progenitor race referred to as the First Civilization. They created humanity as servants, are responsible for our myths/conceptions of gods, and suffice it to say much of their society was wiped out by a calamity. A very small percentage of their technology and genetic materials (as well as a few actual members of the species) have come into the mainline human world, though there may be even more to it than that as AC: Origins suggested that they may have some sort of 4th-dimensional perception/power), and that leads to many of the macguffins in the world "ie pieces of Eden" being advanced tech, as well as certain characters (including the protagonists of the games and other characers of the bloodline) having a certain amount of super-human ability; the ability to make use of First Civ artifacts and/or not be controlled by them, as well as the "Eagle vision" gameplay mechanic that lets the player spot good guys, bad guys etc.. in many title all come from this. There are also hidden areas all over the world that are caches of knowledge, weapons, or other special tech related to or created by the First Civ. AC:Odyssey is set the earliest in the continuity that we know of thus far, and First Civ tech is central to the story. Some earlier games it had a more peripheral role and in fact some earlier titles had absolutely amazing setpieces for their time when you discovered this sort of thing - AC 2 is the most notable, but AC3's ending is another big one. Though the are plenty of other big moments in other games!

Suffice it to say , genetic memory/manipulation is a major AC universe trope and advanced tech exceeding our own could easily allow for a bloodline story to be told even without simply a male+female sexual experience being the only way to conceive a child.

No matter what this is not a "SJW/ political correctness" issue - it is a game design and narrative focus/agency issue.
 
Both haters and devolopers are at blame. If you are willing to accept bi and homo main characters in a plot that will create a dinasty/ blood line, you must be ready for anything.
Crusader Kings 2 is a purely dinastic game, but one can actively role play homo and bi characters.
They get involved in political marriages with very low fertility rates, or decide to educate their nephews and prepare them to continue the dinasty as a side bloodline.
A homo character could accept a political marriage or a one night stand to produce a biological heir, a bi character could engage in a love triangle, a child could be adopted, or if all else fails, a plot nephew can continue the bloodline.
There is no need for a homo character be plot forced to abandon homosexuality forever only to leave a bloodline.
 
After Baldur's Gate 2 and NWN's romances I stopped caring about that nonsense.
 
I'm sitting here upset that Odyssey is a single player game with micro-transactions and the choices you make in the game don't matter, much like Fallout 4.
 
Right. But some of them are saying that the game shouldn't have forced the decision to have a baby upon the player. "What if I didn't want my character to have a kid!" or "They could have written the story so that the baby was randomly left on the doorstep."

I'll agree that it seems weird to offer the player a choice to go exclusively gay or lesbian in the main game only to force them into a hetero encounter in the DLC (if that's what's happening here) but the real turnoff for me is the manner in which many of those commenters reacted when people tried stating any opinions that didn't align 100% with the outrage. Some of the comments were so hostile and over-dramatic that it made me lose any sympathy that I might've otherwise had for those folks.

Right.
I dont see them hammering book authors because 2 primary M/F characters had a baby.
If you dont like the game, dont buy it.
 
Ummm, like I’m all about equality and inclusion and all that good stuff, but how else are they supposed to be able to birth a child? Like....this seems like a really stupid thing to be mad about.

Also, if Ubisoft really wanted to go down the ultra-progressive route so badly, I’m surprised they didn’t just make the character bisexual. I presume that would have saved them a lot of outrage from the SJW crowd while still sticking to the biological fact that you need a heterosexual pair to birth a child.
 
Ummm, like I’m all about equality and inclusion and all that good stuff, but how else are they supposed to be able to birth a child? Like....this seems like a really stupid thing to be mad about.

Also, if Ubisoft really wanted to go down the ultra-progressive route so badly, I’m surprised they didn’t just make the character bisexual. I presume that would have saved them a lot of outrage from the SJW crowd while still sticking to the biological fact that you need a heterosexual pair to birth a child.

Outside of the obvious question of, why do they even need to have the character have a kid? Bloodline is pretty meaningless to the series at this point and hasn't actually mattered since 3 so its not like Alexios or Cassandra making a kid really matters in the grand scheme of things. Beyond that, people care because it robs the game of one of the things Ubisoft hammered in their marketing from the get go, player choice and being allowed to decide what gender the character is attracted to (if any). If they had been straight from the get-go no one would have cared. However, they weren't. They were supposed to be whatever the player decided they would be. And, you're right, if they had been shown as bisexual from the get-go that would have helped too. They could have shown them being bi, but still allowing the player to pick whoever they wanted to sleep with. They didn't do any of that so they deserve the scorn they get for going against their promise to the players.

Also, as to how to accomplish it without forcing a heterosexual romance: First Civilization. They have an easy deus ex machina right there to get around issues like certain technology or medical techniques not being around in that era.
 
Outside of the obvious question of, why do they even need to have the character have a kid? Bloodline is pretty meaningless to the series at this point and hasn't actually mattered since 3 so its not like Alexios or Cassandra making a kid really matters in the grand scheme of things. Beyond that, people care because it robs the game of one of the things Ubisoft hammered in their marketing from the get go, player choice and being allowed to decide what gender the character is attracted to (if any). If they had been straight from the get-go no one would have cared. However, they weren't. They were supposed to be whatever the player decided they would be. And, you're right, if they had been shown as bisexual from the get-go that would have helped too. They could have shown them being bi, but still allowing the player to pick whoever they wanted to sleep with. They didn't do any of that so they deserve the scorn they get for going against their promise to the players.

Also, as to how to accomplish it without forcing a heterosexual romance: First Civilization. They have an easy deus ex machina right there to get around issues like certain technology or medical techniques not being around in that era.

I’ll confess I haven’t played through the series or followed the marketing, so I’ll concede that what you’re saying is true. I had to formulate an understanding based on what I saw here. That said, it seems to me that this entire situation was completely avoidable. It really sounds like they had a lot of ways to make this without setting themselves up for unnecessary controversy, I’m surprised that no one in the room could have figured it out.
 
The amount of people who are REALLY sore about this is probably pretty small, but it is a crappy thing to do in the context of the rest of the game. The entire mainline game allows the player to have full control over romance or lack thereof.

Which begs the question why this would be included in a game where the pre-existing lore demands the character have a baby.

Oh, I forgot, everyone's jumping on the "we want to be inclusive" bandwagon these days **cough EA/BF5** even if it ruins the series-wide plot or suspension of disbelief.
 
I’m a liberal millennial, and even I think this outrage against the dlc is ridiculous. If you don’t like it, don’t play it.
 
Ubisoft shouldn't apologize to these soft-dicked soy boys and large-clit feminazis, they should apologize to AMD card users, we're the ones that are actually have a legit complaint!
 
There are some genuinely scary people up in here. Thank fucking god there are still good people (scattered here and there though they may be) to keep things sane.
 
I think its mostly about them not spending the extra effort when they said they were doing a homosexual story line. They could have come up with some kind of adoption story or something. Seems like they opted for a cheaper route so they had to make fewer scenes which I think is why some are upset. It'd be like having a racing game say they added trucks, but they really only added it as an unlock you have to earn. Reality is they didn't do what people expected, which is let you drive a truck from the get go. Now the truck people are mad, those damn truck people they were lucky they even got a truck as an option.
 
... I mean the game's got time travel and minotaurs no? Just have Zeus swoop down and grow a baby from your finger or some crap.
 
I think its mostly about them not spending the extra effort when they said they were doing a homosexual story line. They could have come up with some kind of adoption story or something. Seems like they opted for a cheaper route so they had to make fewer scenes which I think is why some are upset. It'd be like having a racing game say they added trucks, but they really only added it as an unlock you have to earn. Reality is they didn't do what people expected, which is let you drive a truck from the get go. Now the truck people are mad, those damn truck people they were lucky they even got a truck as an option.
All these suggestions for additional options to accommodate a homosexual romance are simple to type, but are actually probably very costly in time and money to actually implement, and would come at the expense of a more focused normal relationship. It wouldn't just be a matter of dropping in a cutscene, but would probably require many storyline and game state changes.
 
Irrelevant. Ubi promised player agency and choice and stripped it away doing a poor job (reportedly) in the process. The context of the choices are entirely irrelevant. It was Ubisoft's job to honor the player's decisions or find a believable way to work around them. This is a game series dealing with a damn near godlike, hyper advanced, earlier civilization with tech that exceeds our modern time by hundreds, or thousands, of years. You want me to buy the excuse that they are unable to find a better solution than ham-fistedly shoving a straight relationship into a game built on player choice?
Most people have absolutely no problem with gay people. Whiny gay activists who somehow think they are special and who believe people have to accommodate their capricious demands are "irrelevant"...
 
Most people have absolutely no problem with gay people. Whiny gay activists who somehow think they are special and who believe people have to accommodate their capricious demands are "irrelevant"...

The only people being whiny in this thread are the people somehow hyper offended about people having an issue with Ubisoft failing to live up to their promises to players.
 
All these suggestions for additional options to accommodate a homosexual romance are simple to type, but are actually probably very costly in time and money to actually implement, and would come at the expense of a more focused normal relationship. It wouldn't just be a matter of dropping in a cutscene, but would probably require many storyline and game state changes.
Exactly, that's essentially their gripe.
 
I actually just finished this DLC tonight. The irony of this is the relationship with Neema (yes I'm a barbarian that actually prefers to play a male protagonist, I also kill everything that looks at me funny) is the first one I've encountered in the game that I actually gave a slight shit about. Not one of the other characters mattered to me one damn bit with the possible exception of the kid Phoibe and what happens. Essentially Ubisoft is being flamed for finally actually writing a semi decent story arch.

I thought the entire second chapter DLC was pretty good overall. What's not to like about putting giant flamethrowers on warships, killing evil bitches and getting laid? Now the third is pretty much guaranteed to be an over the top SJW drama instead of the solid gameplay supported by a thin but entertaining plot line that good AC games have always been? Instead of Darius and Alexis putting a blade through Amorges is this going to turn into a 3 way sausage party? Maybe instead of an epic final battle we'll get what? The sun setting on a pride parade after everyone has kissed and made up?
 
I actually just finished this DLC tonight. The irony of this is the relationship with Neema (yes I'm a barbarian that actually prefers to play a male protagonist, I also kill everything that looks at me funny) is the first one I've encountered in the game that I actually gave a slight shit about. Not one of the other characters mattered to me one damn bit with the possible exception of the kid Phoibe and what happens. Essentially Ubisoft is being flamed for finally actually writing a semi decent story arch.

I thought the entire second chapter DLC was pretty good overall. What's not to like about putting giant flamethrowers on warships, killing evil bitches and getting laid? Now the third is pretty much guaranteed to be an over the top SJW drama instead of the solid gameplay supported by a thin but entertaining plot line that good AC games have always been? Instead of Darius and Alexis putting a blade through Amorges is this going to turn into a 3 way sausage party? Maybe instead of an epic final battle we'll get what? The sun setting on a pride parade after everyone has kissed and made up?

It’s good to hear that the relationship is well written but it doesn’t change that Ubisoft failed to live up to their promises. LGBTQ+ folks have had to suffer decades of queerbaiting bullshit so there is an expectation of a massive company like Ubisoft to live up to their promises and not just throw away one of the pillars of their marketing on a whim. If they wanted to write a story where the mains end up having a kid and a straight relationship then they shouldn’t have promised to allow the player to make them gay in the main game. People get so hung up on this dealing with a minority that it bounds them and makes them ignore the crux of the problem. It really isn’t that different from BioWare lying about ME3’s endings and faiiling to deliver on their promises.
 
That noisy few percent offended by the reality of why there are only two sexes in a vast majority of cases.
 
The only people being whiny in this thread are the people somehow hyper offended about people having an issue with Ubisoft failing to live up to their promises to players.

I think snowflake mentality is contagious. When someone observes another whining about something, they then proceed to whine about the person whining. And it keeps moving on and on until everyone is complaining and no one remembers what for.

If the company apologizes then they get outed for feeding the snowflakes, if they say "just don't buy it" then they are outed for being arrogant. No one can win.

Now I just want to go pick up this game anyways lol.
 
Started to read the article, then started to read the thread and realized I just couldn't be bothered to give a fuck. If you are getting offended over something done in an interactive story, because that is what a game is. Then frankly your priorities are seriously fucked up and you need to find something better to do with your life.
 
Started to read the article, then started to read the thread and realized I just couldn't be bothered to give a fuck. If you are getting offended over something done in an interactive story, because that is what a game is. Then frankly your priorities are seriously fucked up and you need to find something better to do with your life.

People get attached to characters in stories. Its been happening ever since people started telling stories. Your argument is fucking stupid.
 
I'm beyond tired of those whose whole identity revolves around their race, gender, or sexual orientation. To me it's the same as basing your very existence on your hair color or love of Skittles.

I was fine with gay folk for years. I never gave them a second thought, either those I knew personally or in the greater context of society as a whole. Apparently they're not happy with such passive acceptance, yet shouldn't such passive acceptance be the goal, where people don't even care what your sexual preferences are? But nooooo . . . they want special treatment and unearned adulation based solely on the fact that they sleep with their own sex. To hell with that. It makes me want to see them forcibly shoved back into the closet.

The above also applies to pussy-hat wearers and race hustlers.

These days, being a part of some ostensibly disadvantaged or oppressed minority is seen as a badge of honor and point of pride. You have white people pretending to be Native American or even black, people claiming mental illnesses they either don't have or overstate (it seems like everyone claims to sit somewhere on the autism spectrum these days). Innate masculine traits are being called pathological, while a child thinking they're the opposite gender and having their neither regions mutilated to support that delusion is considered normal.

Modern society is a basketcase.

You seem like the type that cried "I'm fine with it as long as I don't have to ever see or hear about it" which is not acceptance at all.

But congratulations on admitting you've become a bigot, I guess.
 
Back
Top