I'll just address people getting butt-hurt over this video, because a lot of people seem to see the video as a criticism, when in reality all I am doing is stating a hard canon fact that the Colonial Brotherhood didn't uphold the creed and what it stands for very well. Of course it takes a bit of seeing, and does have an overhanging negative context (as intended by Ubisoft/AC Rogue is the example) but that doesn't make the video a critical/negative video about AC, it's simply a video addressing a negative side to the Assassins that was intended by Ubisoft. I didn't even say whether or not I liked that plot decision in the video. So I don't get the backlash, I'm not criticising anything, I'm simply pointing things out.
Probs just trolling tho Fizhy. The rest of us prefer a mature discussion or sharing of POV's. In fact I probably almost bug you with my Shay-love in nearly every vid xD
I like ac but i hate that nonsense future shit with juno. Its so random and why they have roman instead of the greek names that came first and what about ac origins if they havent egyptian gods in the first civilization that would be a little bit stupid, why they dont bring every gods from india, mesopotamia, japan, vikings and more that would be more interessting. The other that i disslike is this endless war between assassins and templar it would be cooler then they fight with different organizations like ac1 templars ac2 borgias ac syndicate some gangsters want to take over london with a buisness man... Know what i mean they have so many alternatives
without a doubt. Every youtuber gets at least 'one'. They dislike all content you post, comment negatively to every video, and literally have nothing else to do. A difference of opinion is beautiful. I like being criticized for my views, but there's a way to go about it - maturely.
I mean that was kind of one of the main points of the Americas trilogy. To show that the Templars weren't Saturday morning cartoon villains like in the Ezio trilogy and that the Assassins weren't Saturday morning cartoon heroes that could do no wrong. They appropriately blurred those lines of morality and imo made the series much more interesting as a whole. Achilles' Brotherhood became wreckless and even controlling to a degree much like the Templars in order to ensure what they perceived as safety and peace. Connor's story was about the rebirth of that Brotherhood as something that resembled Altaïr and Ezio's Brotherhoods aka merely there to ensure freedom and not be authoritative figures that decide what's safe. Ubisoft has been pushing the idea of good and bad divisions of both orders for quite a while now.
Well said brother! It's sad that people keep dissing on the American saga of the AC series, because with AC3 we actually see the Templars' point of view for the first time...
The Colonial Assassins under Achilles were just criminals. In Rogue the only people you killed were just gangs in yellow and black without the hoods. They're responsible for destroying Lisbon, tried to kill Shay when he warned them, had poison gas plants in New York to use against the British Army, and tried to kill innocents to send a message. (Assassin Interception Missions) Connor was a huge improvement because his new Brotherhood didn't use gangs, they helped people, helped the Patriots, turned the Homestead into a community, rebuilt the Aquila which participated in historic wars, helped win the Revolution, made the declaration of independence possible by saving Samuel Adams, protected George Washington, and didn't waste time looking for Precursor artifacts like Achilles. Connor's brotherhood was almost as good as Ezio's to be honest.
BlueSkullX the Colonial Assassins were composed of criminals BUT do were most assassin groups. In brotherhood and revelations, you recruit "enemies of the state" to fight the Bordgia, in all games you kill guards and law enforcement and all the while you have to work with the less than reputable to get your goals seen to since Templars basically own the governments they infiltrate. Lisbon was an accident, Shay was in the middle of interfering with the brotherhood's goals. The gas was not poison since it put those exposed to sleep and was a lie to confuse Shay, the gas was a sleep toxin like in the blow darts and bombs. The assassin interception missions were actually main where Shay protected Templars and their assets, those people weren't innocent. So when we're honest, the slant of rogue is meant to make you question your goals from the previous games but you fail to take into account that Haytham and the other Templars were not above lying your telling half truths.
Anesthetics aren't simply a magic drug that makes you fall asleep. They can have side effects. Medicine and poison are the same thing. It's just a matter of context and dosage. In the right circumstances, they can be helpful. In the wrong dosage, they can be lethal. Also, men, women, kids and adults have different metabolisms so they would require different dosages to be nonlethal. This is why anesthetics are closely monitored during medical operations. In the boss fight against Hope, Shay was poisoned with a lethal form or dose of the sleep toxin. To combat against those effects, he had to keep his heart rate up by staying on the move.
Whether Connor was naive or bold, right or wrong, no one seems to give him credit for this - he rebuilt the Colonial Brotherhood HIMSELF. When Ezio rebuilt the brotherhood, he had the support of his sister, mother, and many other Assassin's, who taught him their skills. While the only one to help Connor was a grumpy old man, who had given up on the Creed. Connor was ALWAYS fighting against greater odds and you have to admire that from a person, who deep down, just wanted for people to live a free and happy life, as he once had.
@@Mr.Crawlyo nah I dont think Ezio can win against a dude who tackles a moose head on. Connor was a tribesman and lived in the forest Ezio is a great assassin but Connor's a fucking brute Hes a tank and is just as (or almost as) nimble as Ezio. At the very least i dont think Ezio is gonna be not crippled after a fight with Connor
Justray Because he is merely trying to understand why he has this particular view. Is that such a bad thing, to be curious and to possibly have an interesting conversation?
It was also not because of the Assassins alone. The Templars of the Colonial/American Rite knew that Britain would be unable to maintain control of the American colonies given the distance and limited technology at the time.
@@yugatrasclart4439 Maybe in the short term, but the size of the Atlantic ocean meant it took months to cross the distance before clipper ships were invented. Hell, that is why Howe didn't receive the orders to march on Philadelphia then Albany to rendezvous with Burgoyne before Howe sailed down the coast to attack Philadelphia alone. Plus, considering their history, it was inevitable that France would start another war with England even if they didn't get involved with the American Revolution.
3 tenets of the colonial brotherhood 1.) Kill as many people as possible, if someone asks you to stop shoot them off a cliff 2.) Fly bright flags so your adversaries know where you are all the time 3.) Uphold nothing, Achilles is always right so blindly follow him and attack your own brothers if he tells you to
Bonus tenets through assassin interception: +.) anyone who helped both sides including Templars is automatically one, which means killing them(David Borgen) +.) anyone who tries to expose us or revolt against us will be killed in public to serve as an example(Kelly Snider and Maria Gurley) +.) anyone who doesn’t share our interests will die on the spot(Scott Lawson) +.) leave the brotherhood at your own risk( Michael Crawlay)
In Conner's defense, it was Achilles and Juno who told him to blindly kill all the templars and when he finally started see things from the templars point of view and actually see some of the noble things they were doing, he actually wanted to work with them and create a better future and forget the past.
Replau the game or go to the wiki he wanted to unite the templars with assassins shit gone down when he learned Whasington tried to destroy his village
Iirc, he ended up splitting with them when Haytham revealed Washington's part in the burning of his village, and how his father seemingly knew of this and didn't clarify it until it was convenient for him. Also the fact Haytham supported Charles Lee and wanted to have him installed as leader. Haytham then also put himelf in between Connor and Charles and tried to kill him as well (or at least made it look like he was trying). Connor would come to regret killing Haytham going by what he wrote by the painting of his father. With Charles, my understanding was Charles was a bit less..reasonable than Haytham could be and would begin to raise the Templars back up, possibly also try to usurp power from Washington, whether directly or by pulling the "advisor" trick.
Shay was actually my favorite, he didn't actually defect because he thought that the assasins code was wrong, he knew that the assasins weren't even following they're own code. `He would have been perfect if he didn't kill Adewale.
- CyberWing375 - Adéwalé was originally fought for freedom of slaves and innocents, which is similar to Shays goal, they could have talk thing out. I mean to Adéwalé he could have quit assassin after and not joining any sides
It felt like after Black Flag, the Brotherhood Edward helped grow was horrifically corrupt. Edward was incredibly efficient as a killer, but as a result, fostered a Brotherhood that embraces his methods rather than push them away. What Edward did reminds me in many ways of the Frye twins. They built a massive syndicate of thugs and criminals to overpower the Templars, but lost control to a rogue assassin, only to do the exact same thing immediately after.
It's basically that Achilles seemed to have adopted an ends justify the means philosophy particularly when it came to the templars and passed it on to the colonial assassins he mentored. It was only a matter of time before a more idealistic assassin came along and got cheesed off at the decisions he was making. I honestly wish we'd see more templar focused games just to drive home the point that the assassins are not defacto heroes nor are templars defacto villains. Connor was more naïve/revenge obsessed but ultimately realized he'd screwed up in the end.
Connor was always chill, he always tried to be peaceful first, but when shit like people in his village being killed occured he did what he had to, don't mistake the old colonial brotherhood with connor, this video ignores and misinterprets a lot about ac 3, the whole point of ac 3 was that the old colonial brotherhood was dogshit and fell and that connor rebirths it anew alike to that of the brotherhoods under altair and ezio
Connor did not just kill people because they were Templars. Johnson was trying to buy up the land Connors village sat upon and he first tried to destroy his tea to stop his funding and when that failed and the elders if his village were threatened only then did Connor kill him. The Colonist rebelled all on their own Connor had nothing to do with that and it was Pitcairn who tried to arrest Samuel Addams and John Hancock but then attacked the rebels and it was only through Connors intervention that the Rebels survived and caused Pitcairn to flee. Then Pitcairn attacked again causing the Rebels to fight back and even though Pitcairn tried to reach a peaceful solution it was his actions that cause the war to escalate nots Connors, it was only with Connors help that rebels managed to survive but he did not cause the war. Hickey tried to assassinate Washington because the Templars diddn't think he was a good leader and Lee (one of their own) would be better in his position. Connor first tried to warn him and again only when that failed Connor had to kill Hickey to save Washington. The only person that Connor truly had a bloodlust for was Charles Lee and even then he killed him because Lee was an asshole and in charge of the Templars so it would be better for him to die. While i agree that the Colonial Assassins were rubbish your "canonical evidence" for why Connor falls under that title is wrong. Connor was not a blood hungry assassin only killing people because they were Templars but an Assassin who tried a more peaceful path and only when that did not work then he resorted to killing and only to save others and not for himself. Also Connor never told Washington who he was, he wanted too but never did and it was Achilles who insisted that the Templars die because they were Templars where Connor thought about working together and only when that failed he killed them.
Brandon Owyong history likes to split the bill on who fired the first shot at the battles of Lexington & Concord. Some say the Patriots/Rebels fired first, some say it was the British. In either case it had nothing to do with Connor. He was busy helping Paul Revere with his ride and making sure Adams/Hancock had safe haven remember?
Well generally speaking the guards are Templars too. For example in Unity, the guys in red are templars(So kill them lol) but the blue is just the police. I generally true to use non lethal methods on the police lol.
Don’t forget who led these colonial assassins- Achilles The guy didn’t stop once to ask why shay was doing stuff that he was doing and was an awful teacher
If we're being fair, in Revelations the dens display the Assassin insignia in plain view of the population and there was that one part where Ezio sort of poisoned an entire city of people with smoke to catch his target, breaking two of the tenets.
True I that was because they didn't have a real true mentor or that was just the start of the assassin's decline when It comes to following the creed and it's morals
@@bouncer2074which ezio points out became a symbol for their enemies to attack and Altair realized this. Watch the last sequence of revelations and you will see this
The Colonial Assassins are similar to the Jedi Order in the prequels, they were in power for so long and were unopposed they became complacent and overall just assholes. Ezio built up the brotherhood in a way that it affected the whole world and the assassins were on top for a long time and didn't really see the templars as a threat until Haytham the god himself showed up and pretty much ended them lol
To be fair, Connor was doing what Ezio was doing in AC2. Ezio was out for revenge and wanted to kill the people responsible. When I was playing AC2, that was the only reason he was with the brotherhood.Of course that changes at the end of the game with the time jump from sequence 11-14, but Connor's main goal was freedom of the people because he knew sometime in the future, if he didn't stop the templars, no matter how good their ideals were then, that it would get corrupt down the line and restric the freedom of the people.
χρονης κ. First off, Ezio didn’t have a reason to kill people, he killed people just for revenge, and that is exactly what Connor did. Second, Connor’s village burned down and his mother died in front of him when he was like 4 because of the templars so he killed them. Connor did not kill anyone who wasn’t involved in the burning of his village. When I was playin AC2, Ezio killed a bunch of people who were barely involved in the execution of his family.
χρονης κ. Connor’s main theme of the game was freedom, he represented the good of the brotherhood. What the templar’s were doing were arguably good, but the put the freedom of the people at risk, they even were fighting with the British. Connor represents the Brotherhood well compared to the original assassins in the colonies.
Saints row and mass effect 4 life Connor killed his father because he was trying to kill him and would have succeeded if Connor did not act or has everybody forgotten the fact that Haytham was choking the life out of Connor when he was killed. One of them was going to die and it was either Haytham or Connor and Connor like all humans wanted to survive and ended up having to kill his father to live.
I would say more naive than ignorant and to be honest, you can sort of understand him being a little more brash than other Assassin's before him, I mean watching your mother get burnt alive as a child is pretty fucking brutal and that anger that he harbors stays with him and contributes to his lack of thought in most scenarios.
Nathaniel Zimmermann So true He Kept the Assassin creed code to heart to the very end. Unlike the previous Colonial Assassin creed. Who action to find the "ones who came before" without realize the sites cause chaos and death to many people.
Ezio didn't follow the Tenants either. He wore the Assassin's insignia on his stomach AND he let Rodrigo Borgia live which in turn GOT INNOCENTS KILLED. He's guilty of the same shit on a slightly lesser scale
But he was younger and he didn't kill him because he didn't see any reason. He said that killing him wouldn't bring his family back but yes he should have killed him
wearing the assassins logo on his uniform didnt mean that ezio broke the tennents almost all assassins have some form of identification on their uniform and if a templar sees someone in an assassins uniform they know that they are an assassin whereas with the assassin gangs they fly a flag which tells every templar that can see it that their is an assassin base there
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he was a broken and defeated man and he wanted him to suffer with the pain of knowing his entire life's pursuit was in vain (a greater punishment than simply killing him) and as he tells Machiavelli the Templars still would've been a threat whether Rodrigo lived or died as they've been for the centuries, and most of the Templars exploits in AC Brotherhood were Cesare's doing not Rodrigo's (who was fine with leaving Ezio alone and spent most of the game behind the scenes trying to clean up Cesare's messes since he'd basically usurped him by that stage). What I find interesting is how many people overlook the fact that Rodrigo actually ensured Ezio's victory in Brotherhood (albeit indirectly) since his attempt to poison Cesare did leave him incapacitated for several months, leaving his soldiers directionless and allowing the Assassins to reclaim the Apple and dismantle Templar influence in Rome. However Ezio is more directly responsible for killing innocents in Cappadocia since he basically blew up the place just to deal with Manuel Palaiologos though he was intentionally a darker and more cynical character but I'm pretty sure that's what made him realize he'd been losing his way and inspired his choice to retire.
I just love how much the Creed fits Connor tho.. Him being a native so having the beliefs he has seems believable and stereotypical from an outside view.. His biracial identity mirrors his feelings. And his anger from life is represented in his combat style, along with his native "monk" feel (Considering Corey May stated he was still a virgin) Altogether still one of my fav characters.. And still sucks he didnt show up in Unity as an older more weathered, world weary man, (Maybe with a beard? Lol) Missed opportunity imo.
CJ Ware I still remember when Unity was first announced and a whole bunch of people, including myself , thought we were going to play as Connor again since it was still close to the same time frame also a scene in AC 3 where someone tells Connor to come to France one day.
+Jorge Mendoza Yeah dude, I was expecting/hoping that Unity would be a Connor Sequel too. If you look at the first reveal-preview-thing for unity, it looks like they used Connor's model, too - no idea why, but it looks just like his profile.
Thats correct, Connor intended to tell washington about the brotherhood and the templars, and Haytham completely disaproved it, saying that Washington was an incompetent leader, Connor did tell Washington only when he figured out that Washington had something to do with his village being burned and with Haytham when he explained that the templars wanted to buy the tribes land in order to secured it, he snaped on both of them and continued his separate way
"...when he explained that the templars wanted to buy the tribes land in order to secured it, he snaped on both of them and continued his separate way" wh-what !? WHY!? That sounds like great idea! The possible best solution for Connor's tribe!
Maybe, But they only wanted to "secure" it to find the precursor site rather than actually looking for the tribes safety, also Connor being an assassin has the ideology that there is nothing more important than life and freedom.
There is another example for what you say: Aveline from AC Liberation. There are side missions in the game where she outright murders buiseness rivals to monopolize trade to New Orleans for her own company.
What I don't like about AC Rogue is that AC3 and 4 handled the grey area in a great way. In AC2 and Brotherhood, the Templars were just power-hungry villains, with no redeeming cause, making for a very black-and-white story. Then AC3 brought back the grey story of AC1, with both Assassins and Templars having their pros and cons. Rogue was supposed to show off the greyest aspect of the Assassins, but instead, we just get another black-and-white story, but this time it's the Assassins who are the bad guys. The game is still pretty good, but the narrative was very rushed
@@BarryAllen__1A23 Haytham became like Birch and Braddock though not as worse as them. He blamed them for lying maniluplating, ruthless while he also showed those characteristics in his later life.
Shay was the only man in the Brotherhood with good common sense. He did the right thing, even if the Templars vied for total control - i don't believe Shay would align with that ideal. In essence, the Colonial Templars were good, the Colonial Assassins were bad. But look elsewhere in the world and there would be a different story. If Shay stayed in France, for example, I believe the Templars would have also tried to have him killed, or otherwise he would have defected following the death of De LaSerre and the damage that the Templars did to innocents (starving them, etc).
Yeah but he was an idiot as well. Keep in mind that Achilles warned him that first civ artifacts were not to be taken lightly and what does Shay do? Just waltzes up to the thing and touches it. Although Achilles conveniently forgets that he said this and brain farts at the opportunity to call Shay out on not listening to his advice.
well What was Shay was supposed to do about that artifact? Could you pick up that artifact without touching it? Also it seemed like near the end they were intending to do the same thing as Shay did, that is until Achilles stopped it in reference to Shay.
Imagine if Ubisoft decided to make Unity's story better by having Shay work with Arno despite the murder of his father. I think that would be an interest story, more-so than what we had. It could develop Arno's character much better, and provide Shay with an extended story... and even a possible end. Personally I would make Arno hunt his father's killer, find out it was Shay, face Shay, and Shay and Arno agree to a truce to defeat the French Templars. Whether or not Shay dies is another area for debate, but it would work either way I feel.
Pretty sure that first tenant was against intentionally killing innocent people. I’m pretty sure they didn’t mean to cause the earthquake, but they still failed to listen to Shay, so I can still understand why that is there.
Im just happy that there are people to support Connor. Being my favourite assassin out of the series and being the reason that i started playing assassins creed in the first place, i like how there are others that like connor like i do and support what he does as a character.
@@kattharsismic 1)Altair 2)ACR Ezio 3)Edward 4)ACB Ezio 5)Arno (if we count the other outfits Arno is 1 as he has a Altair and Ezio(ACB Ezio) and Edward outfit
actually when Arno brings elis the assassin leader actually leasing to Arno and trusted her and he was even going to make peace with the templers so there leader he was okay
Some of Connor's assassinations were still pushed by Achilles though. Connor shows regret at having to kill some of the Templars, especially Haytham after working together, but Achilles assures him every time he questions it that he must die simply because he is a Templar. Yes, Connor is stubborn and follows his beliefs to the end, but Achilles, even after everything that happened in Rogue, is still back to his old ways twenty years later in 3.
Yes, Edward only joined the Assassin at the very end, and even then he only joined them by "fighting on their side" not "fighting like an Assassin" After all, not Assassins members are....well, assassins. Edward only became an official Assassin and eventually a Master Assassin after returning to England
yes but a flag out at sea is much harder to notice than a flag in land and the Jackdaw was so formidable that most naval captains would have known who captained her already so the use of a flag to identify the Jackdaw is petty much useless
Ezio Altair and Shay actually seemed like the creed was their life blood and did everything as an assassin because that was their identity. And shay treated templarism with a sense of that too. I miss the feel of assassins creed almost being a religous experience rather than, ahhh fuck templars kill kill kill, were retarded ahhhh
I know every shits on Conner but he’s genuinely one of my favourite characters in his later life he understands how naive he was during the events of ac3 and does his best to reconcile his past actions. I think the change happened in him after Haythems death or at least when he reflected upon it.
You forgot one essential thing about the 2nd tennant: (hide in plain sight)... They look like they are in a cosplay as compared to the civilians lol... At least Shay's Templar outfits are better doing that job of hiding in plain sight. 2nd point: I think that the colonial brotherhood was flawed mainly because of Achilles Davenport, (the so called mentor). In Rogue, if I'm not mistaken, Adewale gets killed due to his association with Achilles and Shay recognises that "he is a good man". Last important point: as you say Connor gets the brotherhood to reform after AC3 (after Achilles death, when Connor stars thinking by himself and stops being brainwashed by Achilles).
I've got to agree with you here, the colonial assassins did seem very twisted, but to me anyway, Connor's actions were misguided more so than the assassins in rogue. The assassins in rogue were just arseholes and, as you put it, too proud to see their mistakes. However it always seemed to me that Connor was manipulated by Achilles; Connor joined the order because he was angry about his mothers death and blamed Charles lee for it, which is fair enough I guess, but it was Achilles who told Connor to seek out all the Templars and kill them, even his on dad, to me, this is because Achilles still could not let go of his defeat and humiliation so he used Connor to get his revenge. Don't get me wrong, Connor was arrogant and naïve but not a bad guy, the speech they removed from the end of ac3 definitely showed that he understood the error of his ways, but with it being removed he just seemed like a fool.
I think that Connor throughout his life was being used by everybody. They knew that Connor only wanted to protect his people and avenge the death of his mother. Connor was used by the Sons of Liberty, Achilles, among many other people, because they knew that he was noble wanted to protect his people so they used that to their advantage.Connor was also a little bit of a brute and a brilliant fighter, so everybody wanted him on their side because he could kill just about everybody.
Agreed, you've hit the nail on the head there. Connor does seem to change towards the end of the game though as he mentions to Achilles the idea that the assassins and Templars could unite; Connor and Haytham may have actually made a brilliant coalition, but Achilles dissuades him of this, we all know how it went from there..
yeah, not gonna lie, in the end of the game when connor is leaving the homestead his face says it all. he did all of that just to the world to spit on his face. at least he got his own mini community of friends, and the new assassins he trained, that he will probably teach to make sure they dont go through the same path
"the speech they removed from the end of ac3 definitely showed that he understood the error of his ways," I haven't heard of this. What did Ubi remove exactly from the ending?
I'm convinced that Achilles took advantage of Connor's naivety, lust for vengeance for the murder of his mother, and the desperate need to protect his tribe. I think Achilles saw that fire within him and just gave him a little push all for the sake of getting back at the Templars. Luckily, by the end of Connor's game he finally sees how fucked things were and decided/tried to reform the Colonial Brotherhood. (Or at least I like to think that since Ubishit decided to piss on that idea even though it showed great potential. Hell they could have a game where he pretty much leaves the whole Assassin life behind. I think that'd be interesting. Not like betraying the Creed more like abandoning it but that's just me. )
For what i saw in the game, by the time Connor first arrives to the Davenport Manor Achilles has pretty much abandon the assassins and is quite beaten by life and by the events of Rogue, Connor gave Achilles a chance to redeem himself and the brotherhood, to do things right and build the brotherhood as it should had been from the get go, Achilles ends up seeing in Connor the son he wished he had, so pretty much Achilles trains and treats Connor as a father would, "Tough Love" for the sake of Connor, the brotherhood and in memory of all the assassins who died in Rogue
Ivan nuñez Alvidrez I could see that too. Although that just doesn't knock out one of the points of why I think Achilles manipulated him; if Achilles saw Connor as his chance at redemption then why didn't he teach him the three simple rules of not killing the innocent, being stealthy, and never compromising the brotherhood? We never really see Achilles teach him that.
i see your point, it is hard to see it but i see where you are going to, i mean Achilles by any means wanted train or help Connor with absolutely anything, until he saw he was capable of actually do something about avenging his family, go through the training and pretty much complete the entire assassin training, maybe there Achilles realized that Connor was more than capable to do real damage to the Templar order and bring the Colonial Chapter back up to its feet.
Hang on, ima point out some details in the assassin's defense. First I'm sure the assassin's didn't realize they were causing earthquakes, cause at the end of rogue liam wondered if they found an apple of eden, implying they were simply trying 2 look for the apples, otherwise they would've never touched the stuff. Second they didn't believe shay cause he was acting wacko, while he was on thin ice with them. Third the assassin gangs showing off their insignia was no from the first game when masyaf used them as flags. Finally there HAVE been other historical figures who have known about the whole secret war. The Templars are no more innocent, but this comment is already crazy long as it is.
No, during rogue when Adewale came back at the beginning, Adewale explains what happened when he found and tried to take the precurser artifact but achiles still sent Shay, a new recruit, to get another one
Well, Masyaf was a known Assassin stronghold even in our historical timeline. It was destroyed by the son/grandson of Genghis Khan, I forgot which one.
To be fair, Achilles was influenced by Adewale early on in his training. And Adewale was Edward Kenway's quartermaster for a while before becoming a member of the Assassin's. And it is not like Kenway was a good role model in terms of an Assassin while Adewale was his quartermaster. So given that, it is not difficult to see how Achilles could have easily allowed the Colonial Brotherhood to stray from the original tenets of the creed.
Ezio also broke all three tenants. In Revelations, he killed an innocent with his blade, Tarik Barleti. In the first game, when his family was executed, instead of hiding in plain sight, he tries to rush Uberto by screaming at him and threatening him. Finally, he compromised the brotherhood at the end of the first game. Had he killed Rodrigo at the Vault, Cesare would have had no funds to lead an attack against Monterrigioni and the main base of the Assassin's would have been safe.
And? Whats your point? Of course ezio faced Uberto instead of hiding like a little b1tch, its ezio. I mean, they literally executed his two brothers and his dad right in front of him, and the reason to that was Uberto. Of course he was not gonna just hide or stare... And btw, have you even played the ezio games? Cause you sound clueless. You know ezio didn't kill Rodrigo in the first game, right? And no, killing Rodrigo would have solved nothing, even ezio says it himself, killing one person in not gonna solve anything. In fact, the situation would have been much worse if he killed him. The attack to Monteriggioni was gonna happen anyway because in fact that actually is a historical fact, it actually happened.
When uberto was being rushed ezio wasn't an assassin and killing over your murdered family is kinda understandable not right but understandable. I got nothing for rodrigo that was a stupid call
@@ace0719 he wore Assassin's robes and beared an Assassin's weapons. He may not have been a true fully-fledged Assassin at the time but he certainly gave the impression to Uberto that he was one. Not to mention he still broke it later on anyway when he assassinates Uberto in the open.
I said it in Lazerzz Video and i'll say it again. The colonial Assassin's were shit...but it makes sense. Think about it. There's so many countries and so many Brotherhood's in the world that one of them just had to screw everything up. We as people aren't perfect. There's many of us that would rather bend around a few rules instead of follow them. Am i saying they're in the right for this? NO!! What i'm trying to say is the Assassin's aren't perfect. Altair broke the three tenats, Edward killed Assassin's before becoming one, and Connor was never meant to be an Assassin and became the shitlord we know him today. I enjoy this being a factor in the series because if the Assassin's were always doing the right thing 100% of the time, that wouldn't be very realistic. But yes I agree with you and James in every way. Just wanted to throw this out. Keep up the great work Fizhy.
I agree, but I wouldn't say Connor is a shitlord, well at least not canonically. He was the only assassin never to kill a civilian, and initiated a rebirth of the order. As a character he had a lot of issues but he was by no means awful; and you can see Ubisoft tried to do something different
I think this also extends to European assasins. Let's remember how dogmatic was the france brotherhood, and the england brotherhood (Syndicate) practically leaving Henry alone to deal with the templars.
I dare say Connor is the only Colonial Assassin I can think of that achieves any kind of clarity and wisdom by the end of his adventure. At least he doesn't remain ignorant his whole life (which pains me even more when I listen back to his cut speech from AC3. Ubi REALLY should have kept that in).
I can agree on the fact the Colonial Brotherhood didn't have the brotherhood values at their core, they were more extreme and were to focus on keeping the artifacts from the Templar's then fighting for the people. But at the same time (SOME) of their actions are understandable. 1. The gangs of New York had the Assassin symbol on their flags, bad idea (yes) but it shows that the Colonial Brotherhood "CB" were overconfident, pretty much saying "hey were over here if you want to fight" to the Templar's which they probably already knew. 2. CB not believing in shay after he destroyed a city and then tried to kill him. Well shay was still a young recruit into the brotherhood and they probably thought he did something wrong, and when shay was taking the manuscript (in Achilles eyes) that's knowledge to important to lose or fall into wrong hands so they were willing to do anything. But in the end it was Achilles fault For not sending Liam with shay, and for not just sitting down with shay and listing to him. (well Achilles did lose his family so understandable why he was in a bad mood). 3. Connor killing the Templar's and starting a war. Well Connor only did what he was told by Achilles "to kill the Templars" which did kind of start a war, but in the end it was better for America because they weren't under the Templars influence. 4. "Assassin Pride" which is very true they all had it but what do you suspect? if you are constantly being told "you are the Good guys". After all i feel like AC 3 and Rogue main points was trying to show us AC is not as black and white as we think it is. The Assassins and Templars aren't perfect, both sides have flaws and great thing about them. The Colonial Brotherhood was like the italian brotherhood until Ezio restarted it over with the assassin main values, which happened when connor took over it.
I’ve never played rogue, but Adewale was great in black flag. (as a character and as a person) He realized Edward was greedy and only cared about wealth and fame, not caring about who he hurt, and he realized he was complicit in that. When he realized that, he left and joined the assassins.
Connor was mistaken because he was driven by revenge, he only wanted to kill Charles Lee in a way, but saw that he had to kill Haythams associates first. In my opinion, John Pitcairn was the only templar (Alongside Haytham) that had a point, Pitcairn didn't want to kill people, he wanted a protest/conference in order to settle things up with the colonies. Other associates had bad points, Thomas Hickey and Nicolas Biddle being two of them, but at the end it was Connor who made several mistakes. Remember when Haytham read the letter from Washington and Connor said "How I don't know you've been holding this information from me"? Well, even if Haytham told him early, Connor woulda wind up saying "You're just trying to turn me against the assassin's". Now, I honestly think Haytham became less mercyless as he grew up older, seen that he started killing men who didn't needed to be killed, yet, he is still correct in his ways since by what we know, Connor has killed many redcoats before. Edit: There is also a funny fact and that is that Achilles never told Connor about what the previous Assassins did or the mistakes of them, this is seen when Connor is imprisoned in New York and Charles Lee tells him "I tought we eliminated all of your kind" Connor mistook "kind" as race, thinking Charles was talking about the Mohawk, but Charles Lee meant to the colonial Assassins
I always assumed things like the flags and constantly wearing very distinctive outfits was simply a gameplay thing, and not representative as to how it actually happened. I think in AC1 (its been a while some maybe I am wrong) they mention that the animus works like a VR game, taking the memories and making them an interactive (within limits) experience, rather then a really immersive movie. Perhaps the animus is simply replacing the constant changing of outfits for a single set of clothes (for the same reason it doesn't bother to show sleeping/eating/bathroom/etc. It could also be replacing the subtle hidden signs assassins use to identify themselves and their hideouts for the blatent flags as a way to convey the location/identity of assassins to the user, who would have the training or experience to recognize them in reality.
i agree 100% with all you said,but they're not the only example we have of assassins breaking the creed's tenets.Ezio from revelation killed innocents 5 times in the game. 1.Ezio trying to get into that janisary fort.Ezio in order to enter the fort made civilients break the front door for him,wich signaled ottoman soldiers to come and attack them.there's no way many people didn't die there. 2.Ezio killing Tarik without really knowing what he's up to 3.Ezio blowing up a cave 4.Ezio burning an entire fleet in wich probably there were some innocents(and even if there weren't it was somewhat fucked up,ezio in his younger days saved a bad guy from being burned alive by quickly stabbing him) 5.Ezio exploading a lighthouse.
Would you rather have a dude screaming in pain as he dies slowly on a burning stake, or have him die quickly so that he may have no pain, the choice is yours..
This thing does overstate a few things. William Johnson ignored the natives when they decided not to go along and basically told them they could either work with him or die. Even Haytham admits that in hindsight he can understand why Connor killed him shay also failed to learn; achilles did learn (hence why he desperately tries to keep connor from making his mistakes
Something I've never understood : why are we raising a gang in Syndicate (even if it's only Jacob's idea) that ultimatly leads to some bloody events in 1886 ? I mean, in the book about Henry Green, it's clear that the twins know the history of Templars and Assassins, i'm quite sure they both have heroical figures of inspiration, so they must have known that a gang was the worst idea ever…
I caught the "assassins are kinda like terrorists even when you're an assassin" vibe playing rogue years ago. I know it must've been purely for story that way itd make sense and am easy transition to play as a Templar. But this video definitely expanded on how it actually wasn't just for story(or what I was talking about).
For the ppl out there saying that the Templar’s were British, they weren’t. They were helping the British in the war but that doesn’t necessarily mean they work for or are British, they both had there separate ways of doing things and kinda looking for different things also.
Connor was just too strong for the Templars, although an old ass Haytham kicked his ass, and also, Haytham *let* Connor kill him, I don't think a genius tactician with the intention of winning would choke a man to death when he has hidden blades that he could use to kill Connor right then and there.
It makes sense that one of the most isolated assassin's brotherhoods would stray from the creed and begin acting as its own echo chamber. When it took so long to get there, i bet they weren't in constant contact with London or Paris, and those had enough on their hands with the french revolution and Napoleon.
We all know that the Assassin's aren't that 'villain like' like in AC Rogue. But I think they did it on purpose because that's the way how Templars think about the Assassin's in general. They did a good job with that.
koekiaan and rogue was ugly templar Juhani Otso Berg propaganda. Which failed since his cruel, cold just like Haytham, and criticized Haytham's emotions for Edward and Connor even tho Berg did the same with his daughter.
Connor clearly meant well, he knew there was no stopping what was coming and thought he was siding with the "good guys" or maybe just the lesser of 2 evils. I kind of liked the failures of his life and naive judgements he made. It was a strong reflection of the times and hypocracy of the revolution. And the fact that he never allowed the reality of Haythams words break or dissuade him was admirable.
You know, you never hear anybody addressing the fact that Ezio also broke all 3 tenants. Stay blade from the innocent- destroyed a Byzantine city knowing full well of the collateral damage, killed for the Medici with very vague justification (having 'ties' to the archbishop) Hide in plain sight- flew the Assassin flag over Monterigioni, pulled off all kinds of spectacular shit in Constantinople. Do not compromise the brotherhood- chose to spare Rodrigo for his own closure (which bites him in the ass), letting Michaletto; Ceasre's hitman live AFTER he poisoned somebody, handed over 5 first civ relics/ KEYS TO MASYAF to save his love interest
I mean, Altair also broke all three tenants at the start of the game, Ubisoft back then focused on story and character development, in order to improve and build a greater Creed. For the colonial assassin's, I don't see such things.
"Durrr we didn't kill people,the earthquake did" But let me try to defend Connor for a bit(cause i like him). Yeah he has done stupid things like revealing the assassins to Washington,but skill wise,he is a golden example of an assassin. And he managed to bring the creed back to life.
I think the main reason why Connor kills all of the Templars even though they had noble intentions is not because they were just templars and "they were the bad guys". Remember that Connor had visions from Juno to look for achilles when he was young. And many years later, after Connor kills all of the templars he gets another vision from Juno saying that he's done well. After all it was juno who was controlling Connor so that he could get the key from the templars and hide it where only Desmond could find it. Connor was just doing that because of the visions he had. Sure Juno never explicitly told Connor to kill the templars, she told him that there were bad guys in the colonies and he should look for the assassins, pretty sure she knew he would find achilles and be trained to kill the Templars
Altair: I'm gonna change my code to fit my situation and for my own safety... Everyone: bravo master assassin good motive Connor im gonna change my code to fit my situation and to protect my people hell I'll even sacrifice myself :) Everyone: BaD ChArAcTeR!!!
tf are talking about? Altair changed the creed to fit his situation only in the beginning of the game, ffs the whole game is about Altair realizing he was wrong and changing for the better as an assassin and as human being while Connor doesn't give a crap about the creed, all his deeds are purely about revenge and unlike Ezio, who's motivation was basically the same at first, he doesn't change at all, at least not in the game
0:20 "This is coming from a narrative perspective, so opinions really don't factor into this" 0:26 "In this video, I'm going to be going over why I don't think the colonial assassins were really great assassins at all" Disregarding that, there are a few issues with the claims made in the video. 1. Shay was not aware that touching the artifact would cause the earthquake, nor were the other assassins aware. Although the assassin were planning on finding other artifacts after Shay's defection, it was out of ignorance and only at the end of AC rogue did they realize what the artifacts truly caused. 2. AC Syndicate has the twins growing their own gang around London meant for intimidation and acting as a force against the Templars and their gangs; AC Rouge's assassin gangs act the same way, of controlling the colonies and going against the Templars with their british soldiers. 3. Shay brought harm to the brotherhood AFTER he defected. Connor never brought harm to the brotherhood, instead growing it by bringing in a few new members and harming the templars. 1st example: As you stated in a video months before this one, the assassins did not know that the interference with the sight in Lisbon directly caused the earthquake, instead just believing that Shay, being a "loose cannon" wasn't "delicate" enough and something went wrong, or along those lines. Only when Achilles saw the earthquake happen due to his own interference in the North did he realize what Shay was trying to tell him earlier in the game. 2nd example: Connor was focusing on protecting his own land. William Johnson, a templar, after trying to purchase the land diplomatically, proceeded to use violence to get the land. Connor was protecting his kin. Connor was killing templars because they ARE the enemy. Assassins and Templars have been killing each other for as long as they existed. Both have different ideologies that come into conflict, in which Connor was doing what the assassins did best and kill the Templars to avoid their beliefs of firm control from coming into reality. The templars wouldn't have performed the "noble deeds" unless it benefited the Templars' beliefs in any way. The American Revolution still would have started if Connor hadn't joined in. The Boston Tea Party still would have happened, and the Sons of Liberty still would have attempted to dump the tea into the harbor. Connor attempted to prevent the Boston Tea Party, he was protecting the Sons of Liberty during the Boston Tea Party, and he was giving assistance to the Militia with Paul Revere. Even the Templars had an event leaning toward the Revolution, Shay protected Benjamin Franklin while he was a diplomat in France. Some believe that if the French hadn't joined the war with the early US, the 13 colonies wouldn't have gained its independence. Both Connor and his father believe what they are doing (Connor with Assassins and Haytham with Templars) was correct. It makes complete sense that Connor refused to listen to Haytham when he was criticizing his ways. The Assassins in Ac rogue are portrayed as villains is comparable to how the templars are portrayed in every other game. Ac rogue assassins are portrayed as villains coming from Shay's perspective, showing the Assassins are trying to control the artifacts which can't be controlled. In AC3, in Connor's eyes, he is trying to stop the Templars from taking harsh control over the new nation. In other games it's the same way: Ac1 Altair is trying to stop the Templars from controlling the Holy Land, ac2 Templars in Italy, Ac Unity with France, Ac Syndicate with London, etc. 12:00 "And this isn't opinion based ... this is just how it is" That isn't what you said at 00:26, "I'm going to be showing you why I DON'T THINK" There are many, many flaws in this video. It seems more like you made this video to attract views rather than give us a real interpretation of why the colonial assassins aren't as great as they seem to be. You've blown up and heavily exaggerated many details. The colonial assassins during Rogue were most likely portrayed the way they were to keep Ac Rogue more like an assassin game, since Shay sneaking around and assassinating is not seen any where else in the game to the same degree of Shay himself. You could cut out all the dialogue and replace the assassin flag textures with templars and just call Shay another assassin, and you have no difference with other games.
Another great example of them breaking the tennets is how Chevalier bombarded the homestead just to take down Shay. Surely, he should have realised that he would probably kill dozens of his own allies for only one potential enemy. Sounds like compromising the brotherhood to me.
I mean, to be fair, every assassin was terrible at hiding in plain sight. not only did they have the most noticeable and recognizable robes ever that any templar with a functioning brain cell will know instantly who they are, but if the robes weren't a dead give away they have their assassin insignia decorated on their robes. so even a brain dead templar would be able to recognize any assassin out in the streets, that's why social stealth never made much sense to me
I think Connor will be a better mentor than Achilles ever was. He would train his students under the right principles he believes in, and maybe even some of his father's principles since you can see in Connor's speech he had deep respects for his dad even if he was a templar. He will be the one to forge a new colonial brotherhood much better than the one Achilles had.
The main disagreement I have are regarding Libson and the Revolution. Libson was an accident pure and simple. The Assassins had no intention of starting that earthquake. Had Shay simply communicated what exactly happened instead of running in there kicking and screaming like a child, they may have listened to him. Shay was a kid racked with guilt and PTSD and Monroe saw this and took advantage. The Assassins bullying people and taking houses, that's another thing and what the game should've focused on. Though it came across more as underlings being drunk on power more than anything else. Second, the Templars in AC1 also had noble reasons, doesn't mean they shouldn't have died. The assassins are about freedom of will. The colonial Templars were trying to manipulate the people into a false peace as they always do. Revolution would've happened either way because of their lack of representation in the British parliment and the lack of communication about the reasons for their taxation.
@@donaldoduckus6566 you played a lot of ac rogue apparently. That game is portrayed from a Templar pov. Anything assassins do may find evil for us. Just like things Templars did find evil to us in other games
well the roles of the "villains" did kinda reversed after shay bitchyness i guess the reason why Achilles became a depress old man cause he believed the templars won cause he came to regret his choices for his rite and felt a spark of redemption after Connors worthiness
Its called shitty writing. Instead of calming down, explains what happened carefully, Shay did the dumbest thing and accuses Achilles for purposely making him kill innocents which he didn't and later stole the manuscript. It all could have been avoided if he calmed down, listen to reason but his arrogance took over.
@@W0LV1E45 you think Shay would calmed the fuck down after demolishing one of the world's largest cities, killed nearly 100,000 people, and caused the largest tsunami ever recorded at the time? Maybe if he's someone like Hitler, he'll calm the fuck down.
I like how Connor can run a better Brotherhood than Achilles the well trained assassin... And I'm fairly certain Connor didn't reveal himself as an assassin to George...
I've always liked the idea of an extremist branch of the Assassin Brotherhood. It gives back the moral ambiguity of the Assassin-Templar war that earlier games tried to explore. Al Mualim from the first game is already a perfect blueprint for a compelling AC villain.
1. They didn't know what was going to happen in Lisbon in ac rogue. They go hunting for another site as they didn't believe Shay, but when Achilles gets there, he realises Shay is right and doesn't touch it. 2. This is breaking a strictue so not much to say for this, however everyone loves ezio and his games yet what about brotherhood? Where you had the same, taking over Templar bases and showing the assassin's emblem. That deserves the same criticism the colonial assassin's are recieving too 3. Going off of ac 1, compromise the brotherhood means put it in danger, like Altair bringing the templars to their base or putting their own in danger, which technically they didn't do. Extra. Connor killed templars as he thought Charles Lee and the others burned down his village and, although the templars tried to help, they did it in a wrong way ( like William Johnson killing locals to gain their land ) Sorry for the long response, I just love the colonial games and believe that they do deserve criticism, but also love as they are good games Thank you
There's a fine line between the two orders that's what makes the games plots interesting. Remember when ahmet confronting ezio, haytham confronting Conner?
Fizhy, to be honest with you, AC3 for it's fantastic and good at the same time but also doesn't mean it's bad; look, I get it but please bear with me that the Colonial Assassin's back then are that stupid and broke the 3 tenants of the Creed itself and for Connor? Come on man, you're better that this! Connor is still a kind, gentle, and cool guy but also being brutal, a killing machine, and a loyal follower to his beliefs. And TBH, there's reasons why nearly all the AC fans hated/disliked Desmond and Connor for being boring and such...
I feel like Chivalier is an exaggerated example of one of the two greatest issues with the whole Brotherhood. Chivalier was an arrogant and cruel man who seemed more interested in exploring and looting than actually being an Assassin. But unlike Edward, Chivalier was extremely prideful of his role as an Assassin, and extremely aggressively belittled Shay for not living up to the Brotherhood when Chivalier himself regularly spat in its face. There is only one way I see the Brotherhood accepting a man like this and giving him so much power. Family. We know Assassins traditionally train their children and induct them into the Brotherhood. That's almost certainly how Chivalier was brought in. And we know he came from an incredibly rich and prestigious French family. They must have also been Assassisn. So essentially the Assassins awarded an incredibly high rank to a spoiled brat (with a completely delusional sense of righteousness) just because of his wealth and family ties. At the exact same time, the Assassins *completely* ignored the protege they had at their disposal. That was Shay. It's obvious that Shay is their most skilled operative given that he received no additional training after defecting and yet managed to slaughter the entire Colonial Brotherhood. Their issue with him is that he lacks discipline and wisdom, but all they do is belittle him and point that out, rather than actually educating and training him. And this demonstrates the other huge issue. They had it too easy. In Ezio and Edward's time, the Assassins were pushed to the brink of extinction in their respective regions of the world. There wasn't a single resource they didn't take advantage of. For example, in Black Flag they were forced to ally with and use Edward, when every single one of them (aside from Mary) would have preferred to kill him. The result was that eventually Edward came around and wholeheartedly dedicated himself to the Brotherhood. I think Achilles was another Assassin brought in through family, or at least when he was inducted, his training was far more focused on the traditions and supposed infallibility of the Assassins. At the same time he was placed into a far greater position of power than any Mentor we have previously seen. Achilles demonstrates an attitude he later passed to Connor. Templars are the enemy. End of story. The Brotherhood was never founded to fight the Templars. It was founded to fight injustice and bring freedom. Achilles acts like he's having a competition, not determining the future of humanity. The Templars want a piece of Eden? Well then the Assassins need *ALL* of the pieces of Eden. No questions. Achilles could have burned the manuscript and destroyed the precursor box, ensuring those pieces of Eden were never found. And the whole time he never questioned his own morality, as he was clearly raised to believe that everything he did was right by default because he was an assassin.
It is a recycled version of the previous incarnation of Jedi Order. The Colonial Brother refused to evolve. If one ever tried to reform the group, he/she would be hit with a sush order. I do believe Achilles had a large hand in Shay's falling to the darkside. If Achilles had been more open to the older teachings, he would not have given Haytham an opportunity to bring about the Templar. If the Brotherhood of old realised Shay was correct then that could have alieviated the problems and suffering the Americas felt and possibly reunite the Assassins and Templar into one balanced order, a notion Connor tried to reconcile with despite Achilles' protests.
Connor was killing templars because a vision told him "Do it or your village will suffer" and what happens next? He kills them all and the village still suffers. There was no loyalty in there only interest
You should make a video about what would have happened if Shay finished off Achilles when Haytham shot him in the knee, at the end of Assassin's Creed Rogue. Achilles would have not been around to train Connor into becoming an Assassin. And what you said in this video, the entire American Revolution could have been stopped if Shay just killed Achilles.
He said that the other assassins (AKA the colonial assassins in AC Rogue) killed some innocents and TOOK A HOSTAGE, A RANDOM, INNOCENT HOSTAGE TO LURE OUT SHAY
@@camm3217 and when did Ezio killed innocents? I mean sure, Altair, Edward, Shay, all these boys defenetly killed innocents, but the others? not so sure...
@@ariqrahman2022 did he? shit I haven't played this game in a while so I guess that explains why I forgot that... still what of the others, Arno, that chick from liberation, Bayek? (haven't played all this games so can't tell) and although there's been a while since I played AC3 but if I remember correctly Connor did kill innocents in that sequence where he killed his father
I recently played through AC Rogue and the one thing I just couldn't get over was that the assassins... well they weren't really the assassins like in the other games. I expected rogue to be the greyest AC game but instead the assassins were just straight up villians using chemcial warfare on civilian
I don’t blame the Assassins for the earthquakes. They didn’t know specifically that the artifacts caused the earthquakes, and at the end when Achilles gets incontrovertible evidence that removing the artifacts cause earthquakes, he says Shay was right and doesn’t take it. It’s baffling that people forget this part of the story. Achilles mistakenly assumed that Shay must have done something wrong and let his war against the Templars obscure putting two and two together. He ends up making the right choice at the end and doesn’t sacrifice any lives, so I can’t put the earthquakes against the Assassins as an example of them flouting the Creed since they weren’t aware.
You can't use Lisbon as an example, they didn't know that would happen, it was an accident. "Stay Your Blade From The Flesh of The Innocent" means don't intentionally kill bystanders to further the goals of the Brotherhood, not "never kill anyone ever". The idea that anyone thinks Lisbon counts as breaking one of the tenets is absolutely asinine.
They were, indeed, a wrongdoing generation of the Brotherhood. The Colonial Templars had the old views of the Brotherhood in mind, Peace in All Things, and that's what the Brotherhood changed in their goals. Haytham, seeing this, converted Shay to the Order, and also tried the same with Ratonhnhaké;ton/Connor, but felt there was no convincing Connor, and tried killing him. Also, it was not Shay's fault for Lisbon's destruction, for he had no knowledge of what the fuck would happen. He just followed Achilles, his mentor's, orders. So, yes. They were an evil representation of the Brotherhood.
I don't understand the example of 'if Connor wasn't hasty, the American Revolution wouldn't have happened' even though it wasn't really Connor's fault the colonies wanted freedom. Haytham literally wanted Washington dead so he could replace him with a Templar that would rule over them like the king of England. That was a very poor example of Connor killing innocents
Achilles didn't manipulate Connor because both and Achilles were told by Juno to pursue the Artifacts and keep them away from Templars...Juno did manipulate Connor especially... Although Charles Lee didn't burn his village, he didn't save it either... Templars weren't good either..so Achilles telling Connor to kill Templars isn't a bad thing...
I'll just address people getting butt-hurt over this video, because a lot of people seem to see the video as a criticism, when in reality all I am doing is stating a hard canon fact that the Colonial Brotherhood didn't uphold the creed and what it stands for very well. Of course it takes a bit of seeing, and does have an overhanging negative context (as intended by Ubisoft/AC Rogue is the example) but that doesn't make the video a critical/negative video about AC, it's simply a video addressing a negative side to the Assassins that was intended by Ubisoft. I didn't even say whether or not I liked that plot decision in the video. So I don't get the backlash, I'm not criticising anything, I'm simply pointing things out.
Probs just trolling tho Fizhy. The rest of us prefer a mature discussion or sharing of POV's. In fact I probably almost bug you with my Shay-love in nearly every vid xD
I like ac but i hate that nonsense future shit with juno.
Its so random and why they have roman instead of the greek names that came first and what about ac origins if they havent egyptian gods in the first civilization that would be a little bit stupid, why they dont bring every gods from india, mesopotamia, japan, vikings and more that would be more interessting.
The other that i disslike is this endless war between assassins and templar it would be cooler then they fight with different organizations like ac1 templars ac2 borgias ac syndicate some gangsters want to take over london with a buisness man...
Know what i mean they have so many alternatives
Ac lover why you watch him?
Ac fanatic
I'm pretty sure 'Ac lover' is just having a joke on a trolly account.
without a doubt. Every youtuber gets at least 'one'. They dislike all content you post, comment negatively to every video, and literally have nothing else to do. A difference of opinion is beautiful. I like being criticized for my views, but there's a way to go about it - maturely.
I mean that was kind of one of the main points of the Americas trilogy. To show that the Templars weren't Saturday morning cartoon villains like in the Ezio trilogy and that the Assassins weren't Saturday morning cartoon heroes that could do no wrong. They appropriately blurred those lines of morality and imo made the series much more interesting as a whole. Achilles' Brotherhood became wreckless and even controlling to a degree much like the Templars in order to ensure what they perceived as safety and peace. Connor's story was about the rebirth of that Brotherhood as something that resembled Altaïr and Ezio's Brotherhoods aka merely there to ensure freedom and not be authoritative figures that decide what's safe. Ubisoft has been pushing the idea of good and bad divisions of both orders for quite a while now.
This needs more upvotes!
+Ozair Chishti So in other words, Connor was to the Colonial Assassins what Luke Skywalker was to the Jedi Order.
Well said brother!
It's sad that people keep dissing on the American saga of the AC series, because with AC3 we actually see the Templars' point of view for the first time...
Jinhunter Slay you just needed to know the templars objective to understand their point of view
Assassins or templars both are extremes, both "evil"
Ozair Chishti Thank you. For such good comment on our hero Connor.
The Colonial Assassins under Achilles were just criminals. In Rogue the only people you killed were just gangs in yellow and black without the hoods. They're responsible for destroying Lisbon, tried to kill Shay when he warned them, had poison gas plants in New York to use against the British Army, and tried to kill innocents to send a message. (Assassin Interception Missions) Connor was a huge improvement because his new Brotherhood didn't use gangs, they helped people, helped the Patriots, turned the Homestead into a community, rebuilt the Aquila which participated in historic wars, helped win the Revolution, made the declaration of independence possible by saving Samuel Adams, protected George Washington, and didn't waste time looking for Precursor artifacts like Achilles. Connor's brotherhood was almost as good as Ezio's to be honest.
BlueSkullX the Colonial Assassins were composed of criminals BUT do were most assassin groups. In brotherhood and revelations, you recruit "enemies of the state" to fight the Bordgia, in all games you kill guards and law enforcement and all the while you have to work with the less than reputable to get your goals seen to since Templars basically own the governments they infiltrate. Lisbon was an accident, Shay was in the middle of interfering with the brotherhood's goals. The gas was not poison since it put those exposed to sleep and was a lie to confuse Shay, the gas was a sleep toxin like in the blow darts and bombs. The assassin interception missions were actually main where Shay protected Templars and their assets, those people weren't innocent. So when we're honest, the slant of rogue is meant to make you question your goals from the previous games but you fail to take into account that Haytham and the other Templars were not above lying your telling half truths.
Anesthetics aren't simply a magic drug that makes you fall asleep. They can have side effects.
Medicine and poison are the same thing. It's just a matter of context and dosage. In the right circumstances, they can be helpful.
In the wrong dosage, they can be lethal.
Also, men, women, kids and adults have different metabolisms so they would require different dosages to be nonlethal. This is why anesthetics are closely monitored during medical operations.
In the boss fight against Hope, Shay was poisoned with a lethal form or dose of the sleep toxin. To combat against those effects, he had to keep his heart rate up by staying on the move.
BlueSkullX so you're saying that achilles is a monster and connor is a hero? Please say yes
Whether Connor was naive or bold, right or wrong, no one seems to give him credit for this - he rebuilt the Colonial Brotherhood HIMSELF. When Ezio rebuilt the brotherhood, he had the support of his sister, mother, and many other Assassin's, who taught him their skills. While the only one to help Connor was a grumpy old man, who had given up on the Creed. Connor was ALWAYS fighting against greater odds and you have to admire that from a person, who deep down, just wanted for people to live a free and happy life, as he once had.
Oh hey a Wolfenstein 08 profile pic
The Templars started becoming incompetent once Ezio became involved.
The Assassins started becoming incompetent once Haytham became involved.
Tbh if ezio was in the colonial age he would had defected too but actually kick Connors ass 6 feet under
Never underestimate a guy with a funny knife and a shiny fruit.
mrcrawlyo 🙄
@@Mr.Crawlyo nah
I dont think Ezio can win against a dude who tackles a moose head on. Connor was a tribesman and lived in the forest
Ezio is a great assassin but Connor's a fucking brute
Hes a tank and is just as (or almost as) nimble as Ezio.
At the very least i dont think Ezio is gonna be not crippled after a fight with Connor
Justray Because he is merely trying to understand why he has this particular view. Is that such a bad thing, to be curious and to possibly have an interesting conversation?
“The American revolution could have been avoided” of course a Brit would say that
Edit: this is just a joke
It was also not because of the Assassins alone. The Templars of the Colonial/American Rite knew that Britain would be unable to maintain control of the American colonies given the distance and limited technology at the time.
@@DarkEdgePrince Britain would've held on to America with ease if the French didn't get involved in it
@@yugatrasclart4439 Maybe in the short term, but the size of the Atlantic ocean meant it took months to cross the distance before clipper ships were invented. Hell, that is why Howe didn't receive the orders to march on Philadelphia then Albany to rendezvous with Burgoyne before Howe sailed down the coast to attack Philadelphia alone.
Plus, considering their history, it was inevitable that France would start another war with England even if they didn't get involved with the American Revolution.
@@yugatrasclart4439 When the French got involved the war was already in the Colonies favor.
Lil' GayGay werent the british strained by the other shit they were involved in as well
3 tenets of the colonial brotherhood
1.) Kill as many people as possible, if someone asks you to stop shoot them off a cliff
2.) Fly bright flags so your adversaries know where you are all the time
3.) Uphold nothing, Achilles is always right so blindly follow him and attack your own brothers if he tells you to
I like the 3 xD
"If you have doubts in 1 or 2 check the 3rd tenet"
Bonus tenets through assassin interception:
+.) anyone who helped both sides including Templars is automatically one, which means killing them(David Borgen)
+.) anyone who tries to expose us or revolt against us will be killed in public to serve as an example(Kelly Snider and Maria Gurley)
+.) anyone who doesn’t share our interests will die on the spot(Scott Lawson)
+.) leave the brotherhood at your own risk( Michael Crawlay)
Bruh!
Thank god Connor reformed the brotherhood in his later life.
amen to that
He did it in game, recruiting Assassins.
Thanks to Shay that ended the colonial Brotherhood and let Connor reform it
I liked Shay I agreed with his views I take assassin views more than templar but one thing pissed me off. He kill adawale 😤
@@ryder539 bro I was fucking heated when he did that. And it wasn’t even a good death imo
In Conner's defense, it was Achilles and Juno who told him to blindly kill all the templars and when he finally started see things from the templars point of view and actually see some of the noble things they were doing, he actually wanted to work with them and create a better future and forget the past.
Not really. He would have still kill templars
Replau the game or go to the wiki he wanted to unite the templars with assassins shit gone down when he learned Whasington tried to destroy his village
Still going after Lee and haytham in the end was pretty unnecessary if you ask me and I'm speaking in Haytham's defence.
Iirc, he ended up splitting with them when Haytham revealed Washington's part in the burning of his village, and how his father seemingly knew of this and didn't clarify it until it was convenient for him. Also the fact Haytham supported Charles Lee and wanted to have him installed as leader. Haytham then also put himelf in between Connor and Charles and tried to kill him as well (or at least made it look like he was trying). Connor would come to regret killing Haytham going by what he wrote by the painting of his father.
With Charles, my understanding was Charles was a bit less..reasonable than Haytham could be and would begin to raise the Templars back up, possibly also try to usurp power from Washington, whether directly or by pulling the "advisor" trick.
@@Avinash_Lincoln it was really because Achilles taught him to kill Templars
Shay was actually my favorite, he didn't actually defect because he thought that the assasins code was wrong, he knew that the assasins weren't even following they're own code.
`He would have been perfect if he didn't kill Adewale.
Adewale was just confused
he thought he was going to the right side of the wheel
but he ended up getting stuck with his head beneath it
Adewale would have been perfect if he fought with a machete and blunderbuss in rogue imagine the bossfight
@@clitcrusader4897 yeah not with a wtf is that a fuckin dagger? Im bout to smack ubisoft
How does him killing Adewale affect him being an amazing charaxter?
- CyberWing375 - Adéwalé was originally fought for freedom of slaves and innocents, which is similar to Shays goal, they could have talk thing out. I mean to Adéwalé he could have quit assassin after and not joining any sides
It felt like after Black Flag, the Brotherhood Edward helped grow was horrifically corrupt. Edward was incredibly efficient as a killer, but as a result, fostered a Brotherhood that embraces his methods rather than push them away.
What Edward did reminds me in many ways of the Frye twins. They built a massive syndicate of thugs and criminals to overpower the Templars, but lost control to a rogue assassin, only to do the exact same thing immediately after.
It's basically that Achilles seemed to have adopted an ends justify the means philosophy particularly when it came to the templars and passed it on to the colonial assassins he mentored. It was only a matter of time before a more idealistic assassin came along and got cheesed off at the decisions he was making. I honestly wish we'd see more templar focused games just to drive home the point that the assassins are not defacto heroes nor are templars defacto villains. Connor was more naïve/revenge obsessed but ultimately realized he'd screwed up in the end.
Connor was always chill, he always tried to be peaceful first, but when shit like people in his village being killed occured he did what he had to, don't mistake the old colonial brotherhood with connor, this video ignores and misinterprets a lot about ac 3, the whole point of ac 3 was that the old colonial brotherhood was dogshit and fell and that connor rebirths it anew alike to that of the brotherhoods under altair and ezio
Connor did not just kill people because they were Templars. Johnson was trying to buy up the land Connors village sat upon and he first tried to destroy his tea to stop his funding and when that failed and the elders if his village were threatened only then did Connor kill him. The Colonist rebelled all on their own Connor had nothing to do with that and it was Pitcairn who tried to arrest Samuel Addams and John Hancock but then attacked the rebels and it was only through Connors intervention that the Rebels survived and caused Pitcairn to flee. Then Pitcairn attacked again causing the Rebels to fight back and even though Pitcairn tried to reach a peaceful solution it was his actions that cause the war to escalate nots Connors, it was only with Connors help that rebels managed to survive but he did not cause the war. Hickey tried to assassinate Washington because the Templars diddn't think he was a good leader and Lee (one of their own) would be better in his position. Connor first tried to warn him and again only when that failed Connor had to kill Hickey to save Washington. The only person that Connor truly had a bloodlust for was Charles Lee and even then he killed him because Lee was an asshole and in charge of the Templars so it would be better for him to die. While i agree that the Colonial Assassins were rubbish your "canonical evidence" for why Connor falls under that title is wrong. Connor was not a blood hungry assassin only killing people because they were Templars but an Assassin who tried a more peaceful path and only when that did not work then he resorted to killing and only to save others and not for himself. Also Connor never told Washington who he was, he wanted too but never did and it was Achilles who insisted that the Templars die because they were Templars where Connor thought about working together and only when that failed he killed them.
You speak the truth, and de-bunk half the video. So of course everyone ignores you in the comments. ;) Well, I'll give you a thumb up.
Darth Bombad obviously since Haytham fanboys will defend him and wont see the error of their ways or sees it but refused to acknowledge it.
Brandon Owyong history likes to split the bill on who fired the first shot at the battles of Lexington & Concord. Some say the Patriots/Rebels fired first, some say it was the British. In either case it had nothing to do with Connor. He was busy helping Paul Revere with his ride and making sure Adams/Hancock had safe haven remember?
Random Guy thank you for defending Connor !!!🙏
Charles lee was a prick
tbh, guards you kill... are... well... innocent.
logicaly you should only kill your target...only.
Yes but sometimes they are Fcking annoying because when you free run they attack you....
Well generally speaking the guards are Templars too. For example in Unity, the guys in red are templars(So kill them lol) but the blue is just the police. I generally true to use non lethal methods on the police lol.
I don't really see the "innocent" part in guards that try to kill you, but maybe that's just me
They want to kill you...So KILL THEM!
I’m pretty sure somewhere in the tenets it says that you are allowed to kill those associated with Templars as a way to get around that.
Colonial Assassins: The tenets are more of a set of guidelines really...
Shay: THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!
If you know what this is from, you're a legend
I get the joke. I think.
even funnier considering Gibbs IS Faulkner (same actor)
Aye Captain Barbossa.
Favorite movie of my time
Even more of a legend If you already knew that those two lines of dialogue are actually in two entirely separate scenes 😉
Don’t forget who led these colonial assassins- Achilles
The guy didn’t stop once to ask why shay was doing stuff that he was doing and was an awful teacher
Just like Yoda who made the same mistake and was responsible for Anikin's fall to the dark side.
If we're being fair, in Revelations the dens display the Assassin insignia in plain view of the population and there was that one part where Ezio sort of poisoned an entire city of people with smoke to catch his target, breaking two of the tenets.
True I that was because they didn't have a real true mentor or that was just the start of the assassin's decline when It comes to following the creed and it's morals
Masyaf also didn't shy away from proudly displaying assassin insignia in plain view
He also caused an earthquake in an underground city, potentially causing multiple deaths and injuries, and definitely displacing a bunch of people
@@bouncer2074which ezio points out became a symbol for their enemies to attack and Altair realized this. Watch the last sequence of revelations and you will see this
The Colonial Assassins are similar to the Jedi Order in the prequels, they were in power for so long and were unopposed they became complacent and overall just assholes. Ezio built up the brotherhood in a way that it affected the whole world and the assassins were on top for a long time and didn't really see the templars as a threat until Haytham the god himself showed up and pretty much ended them lol
Slnci same when Abbas took control of Masyaf, they became corrupt because of the power
Slnci
That's actually the most accurate way of putting it!
Slnci that's exactly how I feel about it, it's more or less just part of their own choices
Ezio built up the brotherhood?Yeah,well...no.That's just wrong.
Wow I was thinking the same thing
To be fair, Connor was doing what Ezio was doing in AC2. Ezio was out for revenge and wanted to kill the people responsible. When I was playing AC2, that was the only reason he was with the brotherhood.Of course that changes at the end of the game with the time jump from sequence 11-14, but Connor's main goal was freedom of the people because he knew sometime in the future, if he didn't stop the templars, no matter how good their ideals were then, that it would get corrupt down the line and restric the freedom of the people.
χρονης κ. First off, Ezio didn’t have a reason to kill people, he killed people just for revenge, and that is exactly what Connor did. Second, Connor’s village burned down and his mother died in front of him when he was like 4 because of the templars so he killed them. Connor did not kill anyone who wasn’t involved in the burning of his village. When I was playin AC2, Ezio killed a bunch of people who were barely involved in the execution of his family.
χρονης κ. Connor’s main theme of the game was freedom, he represented the good of the brotherhood. What the templar’s were doing were arguably good, but the put the freedom of the people at risk, they even were fighting with the British. Connor represents the Brotherhood well compared to the original assassins in the colonies.
more alpha nah ezio had a reason to kill the ppl he kills Connor killed his father for the reason he's a Templar so in short Connor is an asshole
more alpha
Saints row and mass effect 4 life
Connor killed his father because he was trying to kill him and would have succeeded if Connor did not act or has everybody forgotten the fact that Haytham was choking the life out of Connor when he was killed. One of them was going to die and it was either Haytham or Connor and Connor like all humans wanted to survive and ended up having to kill his father to live.
Connor redeemed the colonial assassin's
Connor was, from an assassin standpoint, fairly decent. It's really the Colonial Brotherhood before they're purged that gave the bad impressions.
Yeah like when he bombed the coast of new york to kill one man?
I would say more naive than ignorant and to be honest, you can sort of understand him being a little more brash than other Assassin's before him, I mean watching your mother get burnt alive as a child is pretty fucking brutal and that anger that he harbors stays with him and contributes to his lack of thought in most scenarios.
he did is was the assassins failures before him that did it thats why achiles went into seclusion from all the fuck ups they caused
Nathaniel Zimmermann So true He Kept the Assassin creed code to heart to the very end. Unlike the previous Colonial Assassin creed. Who action to find the "ones who came before" without realize the sites cause chaos and death to many people.
Ezio didn't follow the Tenants either. He wore the Assassin's insignia on his stomach AND he let Rodrigo Borgia live which in turn GOT INNOCENTS KILLED. He's guilty of the same shit on a slightly lesser scale
But he was younger and he didn't kill him because he didn't see any reason. He said that killing him wouldn't bring his family back but yes he should have killed him
wearing the assassins logo on his uniform didnt mean that ezio broke the tennents almost all assassins have some form of identification on their uniform and if a templar sees someone in an assassins uniform they know that they are an assassin whereas with the assassin gangs they fly a flag which tells every templar that can see it that their is an assassin base there
@@swampwolfegaming1233 It's the same thing on a lesser scale. It still breaks the code
@@dasolemnvizitah4473 in that case pretty much every assassins breaks that tenant
Ezio didn't kill Rodrigo because he was a broken and defeated man and he wanted him to suffer with the pain of knowing his entire life's pursuit was in vain (a greater punishment than simply killing him) and as he tells Machiavelli the Templars still would've been a threat whether Rodrigo lived or died as they've been for the centuries, and most of the Templars exploits in AC Brotherhood were Cesare's doing not Rodrigo's (who was fine with leaving Ezio alone and spent most of the game behind the scenes trying to clean up Cesare's messes since he'd basically usurped him by that stage). What I find interesting is how many people overlook the fact that Rodrigo actually ensured Ezio's victory in Brotherhood (albeit indirectly) since his attempt to poison Cesare did leave him incapacitated for several months, leaving his soldiers directionless and allowing the Assassins to reclaim the Apple and dismantle Templar influence in Rome.
However Ezio is more directly responsible for killing innocents in Cappadocia since he basically blew up the place just to deal with Manuel Palaiologos though he was intentionally a darker and more cynical character but I'm pretty sure that's what made him realize he'd been losing his way and inspired his choice to retire.
The colonial templars were better than the colonial assassins but Connor after the events of ac3 righted some of those mistakes
I just love how much the Creed fits Connor tho.. Him being a native so having the beliefs he has seems believable and stereotypical from an outside view.. His biracial identity mirrors his feelings. And his anger from life is represented in his combat style, along with his native "monk" feel (Considering Corey May stated he was still a virgin) Altogether still one of my fav characters.. And still sucks he didnt show up in Unity as an older more weathered, world weary man, (Maybe with a beard? Lol) Missed opportunity imo.
CJ Ware I still remember when Unity was first announced and a whole bunch of people, including myself
, thought we were going to play as Connor again since it was still close to the same time frame also a scene in AC 3 where someone tells Connor to come to France one day.
+Jorge Mendoza Yeah dude, I was expecting/hoping that Unity would be a Connor Sequel too. If you look at the first reveal-preview-thing for unity, it looks like they used Connor's model, too - no idea why, but it looks just like his profile.
CJ Ware I mean Connor to my knowledge is 12 years older than Arno so a game with both characters wouldn't be so far fetched.
If he went to france he might have died.
SIRMARKALOT SUPREME ...Ooookay....?
Hey Fizhy---Connor never told Washington that he was an Assassin. He intended to do but he never got around to it. Or am I wrong.
Broken Bridge no your right and fizhy is wrong 👎🏽
Thats correct, Connor intended to tell washington about the brotherhood and the templars, and Haytham completely disaproved it, saying that Washington was an incompetent leader, Connor did tell Washington only when he figured out that Washington had something to do with his village being burned and with Haytham when he explained that the templars wanted to buy the tribes land in order to secured it, he snaped on both of them and continued his separate way
"...when he explained that the templars wanted to buy the tribes land in order to secured it, he snaped on both of them and continued his separate way"
wh-what !? WHY!?
That sounds like great idea! The possible best solution for Connor's tribe!
Maybe, But they only wanted to "secure" it to find the precursor site rather than actually looking for the tribes safety, also Connor being an assassin has the ideology that there is nothing more important than life and freedom.
Yes you are right, Achilles once told connor not to involve Washington to Assassin's nor Templar's cause. Can't remember why
There is another example for what you say: Aveline from AC Liberation. There are side missions in the game where she outright murders buiseness rivals to monopolize trade to New Orleans for her own company.
The colonial assassin’s seemed to be more motivated by vengeance rather than justice and freedom, Achilles in particular.
What I don't like about AC Rogue is that AC3 and 4 handled the grey area in a great way. In AC2 and Brotherhood, the Templars were just power-hungry villains, with no redeeming cause, making for a very black-and-white story. Then AC3 brought back the grey story of AC1, with both Assassins and Templars having their pros and cons. Rogue was supposed to show off the greyest aspect of the Assassins, but instead, we just get another black-and-white story, but this time it's the Assassins who are the bad guys. The game is still pretty good, but the narrative was very rushed
ac4 is better. we got a wise templar grandmaster unlike ac3/rogue.
wolvie45 Wut? Haytham was unwise? What are you smoking? If haytham persuaded me to become a templar I would've joined his side.
@@BarryAllen__1A23 Haytham became like Birch and Braddock though not as worse as them. He blamed them for lying maniluplating, ruthless while he also showed those characteristics in his later life.
IMO the Templar’s were boring as shit in AC 4 in 3 Haytham was a fucking boss and his death was the most memorable for me out of any character
@@Luckysgay I can't remember any Templars from AC4 but can recall all from 3. Blackflag was overrated trash.
Shay was the only man in the Brotherhood with good common sense. He did the right thing, even if the Templars vied for total control - i don't believe Shay would align with that ideal. In essence, the Colonial Templars were good, the Colonial Assassins were bad. But look elsewhere in the world and there would be a different story. If Shay stayed in France, for example, I believe the Templars would have also tried to have him killed, or otherwise he would have defected following the death of De LaSerre and the damage that the Templars did to innocents (starving them, etc).
Well said
Yeah the assassin's were , shit at dere job dut the templates only did one bad thing at that time
Yeah but he was an idiot as well.
Keep in mind that Achilles warned him that first civ artifacts were not to be taken lightly and what does Shay do? Just waltzes up to the thing and touches it. Although Achilles conveniently forgets that he said this and brain farts at the opportunity to call Shay out on not listening to his advice.
well What was Shay was supposed to do about that artifact? Could you pick up that artifact without touching it? Also it seemed like near the end they were intending to do the same thing as Shay did, that is until Achilles stopped it in reference to Shay.
Imagine if Ubisoft decided to make Unity's story better by having Shay work with Arno despite the murder of his father. I think that would be an interest story, more-so than what we had. It could develop Arno's character much better, and provide Shay with an extended story... and even a possible end. Personally I would make Arno hunt his father's killer, find out it was Shay, face Shay, and Shay and Arno agree to a truce to defeat the French Templars. Whether or not Shay dies is another area for debate, but it would work either way I feel.
No Connor wasn't bad ubisoft mentioned that Connor is the only Assassin who never killed innocents
Lili Rose so shelling New York didn't kill anyone?
Rin Clovis You mean the shelling by the British? You know, the army led by Templars?
Templars were not allied with the British in 3.
Yeah you even get desynced if you don’t skin an animal you kill
Frank James wtf are u talking about
Pretty sure that first tenant was against intentionally killing innocent people. I’m pretty sure they didn’t mean to cause the earthquake, but they still failed to listen to Shay, so I can still understand why that is there.
Isn't it both? whether or not you directly or indirectly kill them, you still broke the first tenant.
@@khairilameer620 Good point
@@Silverwind-bc2cr Didn't expect you to reply on a 1 year comment lmao
@@khairilameer620 I try to check my notifications!😂
Im just happy that there are people to support Connor. Being my favourite assassin out of the series and being the reason that i started playing assassins creed in the first place, i like how there are others that like connor like i do and support what he does as a character.
All the brotherhood make mistakes, but the colonial they were dangerous people.
Félix A.G Wow! Amazing deduction!
Thank you, send me a medal.
wow 100 000 death mistake :)
Waaoo Baaoo naw we can all agree they did that shit the the fun lol
@@adrianshilling1878 ahaha
This makes Arno look good
Plus he has the coolest outfits
Spaghetti0s yup
I think ezio and Connor have the best outfits
1)AC2 Ezio
2)Arno's outfits
3)Connor outfit
4)ACB Ezio
5)Altair
This is my personal top 5 outfits
@@kattharsismic
1)Altair
2)ACR Ezio
3)Edward
4)ACB Ezio
5)Arno (if we count the other outfits Arno is 1 as he has a Altair and Ezio(ACB Ezio) and Edward outfit
actually when Arno brings elis the assassin leader actually leasing to Arno and trusted her and he was even going to make peace with the templers so there leader he was okay
"TRY TO BE SHITTY AT YOUR JOB" 😂😂THAT WAS THE HARDEST YOU EVER MADE ME LAUGH ETHAN HA YOUR A SWEET BOI
Altair kill the innocent old man in first game but he learned his lesson
Some of Connor's assassinations were still pushed by Achilles though. Connor shows regret at having to kill some of the Templars, especially Haytham after working together, but Achilles assures him every time he questions it that he must die simply because he is a Templar. Yes, Connor is stubborn and follows his beliefs to the end, but Achilles, even after everything that happened in Rogue, is still back to his old ways twenty years later in 3.
A flag was on the Jackdaw with an assassin symbol too.
Yes, Edward only joined the Assassin at the very end, and even then he only joined them by "fighting on their side" not "fighting like an Assassin" After all, not Assassins members are....well, assassins.
Edward only became an official Assassin and eventually a Master Assassin after returning to England
Well, they're pirates. What do you expect from them?
Doggoh that’s just a stupid thing to say🤣
yes but a flag out at sea is much harder to notice than a flag in land and the Jackdaw was so formidable that most naval captains would have known who captained her already so the use of a flag to identify the Jackdaw is petty much useless
Also the Assassins Bureau in AC Black Flag are literally on the outdoor, no hidden place like Ac 1 😂
Ezio Altair and Shay actually seemed like the creed was their life blood and did everything as an assassin because that was their identity. And shay treated templarism with a sense of that too. I miss the feel of assassins creed almost being a religous experience rather than, ahhh fuck templars kill kill kill, were retarded ahhhh
You mean killing people (a few of them innocent people) is a "religious experience"? Ok...
Imagine the amount of guilt must have built up in Shay's mind after coming back from Lisbon
portugal
Shay was in Portugal
Ok , corrected it.
@@swampwolfegaming1233 Lisbon is part of Portugal you idiot
I can see that some people struggle with Geography because Lisbon is in Portugal. It’s the capital 😂😂😂
I know every shits on Conner but he’s genuinely one of my favourite characters in his later life he understands how naive he was during the events of ac3 and does his best to reconcile his past actions. I think the change happened in him after Haythems death or at least when he reflected upon it.
You forgot one essential thing about the 2nd tennant: (hide in plain sight)... They look like they are in a cosplay as compared to the civilians lol... At least Shay's Templar outfits are better doing that job of hiding in plain sight.
2nd point: I think that the colonial brotherhood was flawed mainly because of Achilles Davenport, (the so called mentor). In Rogue, if I'm not mistaken, Adewale gets killed due to his association with Achilles and Shay recognises that "he is a good man".
Last important point: as you say Connor gets the brotherhood to reform after AC3 (after Achilles death, when Connor stars thinking by himself and stops being brainwashed by Achilles).
Wow, why doesn't this have many likes?
I've got to agree with you here, the colonial assassins did seem very twisted, but to me anyway, Connor's actions were misguided more so than the assassins in rogue.
The assassins in rogue were just arseholes and, as you put it, too proud to see their mistakes.
However it always seemed to me that Connor was manipulated by Achilles; Connor joined the order because he was angry about his mothers death and blamed Charles lee for it, which is fair enough I guess, but it was Achilles who told Connor to seek out all the Templars and kill them, even his on dad, to me, this is because Achilles still could not let go of his defeat and humiliation so he used Connor to get his revenge.
Don't get me wrong, Connor was arrogant and naïve but not a bad guy, the speech they removed from the end of ac3 definitely showed that he understood the error of his ways, but with it being removed he just seemed like a fool.
I think that Connor throughout his life was being used by everybody. They knew that Connor only wanted to protect his people and avenge the death of his mother. Connor was used by the Sons of Liberty, Achilles, among many other people, because they knew that he was noble wanted to protect his people so they used that to their advantage.Connor was also a little bit of a brute and a brilliant fighter, so everybody wanted him on their side because he could kill just about everybody.
Agreed, you've hit the nail on the head there. Connor does seem to change towards the end of the game though as he mentions to Achilles the idea that the assassins and Templars could unite; Connor and Haytham may have actually made a brilliant coalition, but Achilles dissuades him of this, we all know how it went from there..
yeah, not gonna lie, in the end of the game when connor is leaving the homestead his face says it all. he did all of that just to the world to spit on his face. at least he got his own mini community of friends, and the new assassins he trained, that he will probably teach to make sure they dont go through the same path
Conor Douglas if ubisoft included connors speech in AC 3 i think he wouldve been a fan favorite
"the speech they removed from the end of ac3 definitely showed that he understood the error of his ways," I haven't heard of this. What did Ubi remove exactly from the ending?
I'm convinced that Achilles took advantage of Connor's naivety, lust for vengeance for the murder of his mother, and the desperate need to protect his tribe. I think Achilles saw that fire within him and just gave him a little push all for the sake of getting back at the Templars. Luckily, by the end of Connor's game he finally sees how fucked things were and decided/tried to reform the Colonial Brotherhood. (Or at least I like to think that since Ubishit decided to piss on that idea even though it showed great potential. Hell they could have a game where he pretty much leaves the whole Assassin life behind. I think that'd be interesting. Not like betraying the Creed more like abandoning it but that's just me. )
For what i saw in the game, by the time Connor first arrives to the Davenport Manor Achilles has pretty much abandon the assassins and is quite beaten by life and by the events of Rogue, Connor gave Achilles a chance to redeem himself and the brotherhood, to do things right and build the brotherhood as it should had been from the get go, Achilles ends up seeing in Connor the son he wished he had, so pretty much Achilles trains and treats Connor as a father would, "Tough Love" for the sake of Connor, the brotherhood and in memory of all the assassins who died in Rogue
Ivan nuñez Alvidrez I could see that too. Although that just doesn't knock out one of the points of why I think Achilles manipulated him; if Achilles saw Connor as his chance at redemption then why didn't he teach him the three simple rules of not killing the innocent, being stealthy, and never compromising the brotherhood? We never really see Achilles teach him that.
i see your point, it is hard to see it but i see where you are going to, i mean Achilles by any means wanted train or help Connor with absolutely anything, until he saw he was capable of actually do something about avenging his family, go through the training and pretty much complete the entire assassin training, maybe there Achilles realized that Connor was more than capable to do real damage to the Templar order and bring the Colonial Chapter back up to its feet.
@@shrikefenris6844 stop hating on the templars
@@shrikefenris6844 he literally does, he teaches connor everything wdym
Hang on, ima point out some details in the assassin's defense.
First I'm sure the assassin's didn't realize they were causing earthquakes, cause at the end of rogue liam wondered if they found an apple of eden, implying they were simply trying 2 look for the apples, otherwise they would've never touched the stuff.
Second they didn't believe shay cause he was acting wacko, while he was on thin ice with them.
Third the assassin gangs showing off their insignia was no from the first game when masyaf used them as flags.
Finally there HAVE been other historical figures who have known about the whole secret war.
The Templars are no more innocent, but this comment is already crazy long as it is.
Not even sure if anyone will reply 2 this
You used sound reason and facts, to refute a heavily biased video. Of course they wont respond. ;)
No, during rogue when Adewale came back at the beginning, Adewale explains what happened when he found and tried to take the precurser artifact but achiles still sent Shay, a new recruit, to get another one
Well, Masyaf was a known Assassin stronghold even in our historical timeline. It was destroyed by the son/grandson of Genghis Khan, I forgot which one.
As ezio said: "you contain something you do not understand"
To be fair, Achilles was influenced by Adewale early on in his training. And Adewale was Edward Kenway's quartermaster for a while before becoming a member of the Assassin's.
And it is not like Kenway was a good role model in terms of an Assassin while Adewale was his quartermaster.
So given that, it is not difficult to see how Achilles could have easily allowed the Colonial Brotherhood to stray from the original tenets of the creed.
Ezio also broke all three tenants. In Revelations, he killed an innocent with his blade, Tarik Barleti. In the first game, when his family was executed, instead of hiding in plain sight, he tries to rush Uberto by screaming at him and threatening him. Finally, he compromised the brotherhood at the end of the first game. Had he killed Rodrigo at the Vault, Cesare would have had no funds to lead an attack against Monterrigioni and the main base of the Assassin's would have been safe.
Yeahhhhhh buuuuuut one thingggg
He’s Ezio he’s like Amazing
Jk ur totally right he broke all 3 😂
And? Whats your point? Of course ezio faced Uberto instead of hiding like a little b1tch, its ezio. I mean, they literally executed his two brothers and his dad right in front of him, and the reason to that was Uberto. Of course he was not gonna just hide or stare... And btw, have you even played the ezio games? Cause you sound clueless. You know ezio didn't kill Rodrigo in the first game, right? And no, killing Rodrigo would have solved nothing, even ezio says it himself, killing one person in not gonna solve anything. In fact, the situation would have been much worse if he killed him. The attack to Monteriggioni was gonna happen anyway because in fact that actually is a historical fact, it actually happened.
When uberto was being rushed ezio wasn't an assassin and killing over your murdered family is kinda understandable not right but understandable. I got nothing for rodrigo that was a stupid call
@@ace0719 he wore Assassin's robes and beared an Assassin's weapons. He may not have been a true fully-fledged Assassin at the time but he certainly gave the impression to Uberto that he was one.
Not to mention he still broke it later on anyway when he assassinates Uberto in the open.
He didn't even know what assassin meant at that time
I said it in Lazerzz Video and i'll say it again. The colonial Assassin's were shit...but it makes sense. Think about it. There's so many countries and so many Brotherhood's in the world that one of them just had to screw everything up. We as people aren't perfect. There's many of us that would rather bend around a few rules instead of follow them. Am i saying they're in the right for this? NO!! What i'm trying to say is the Assassin's aren't perfect. Altair broke the three tenats, Edward killed Assassin's before becoming one, and Connor was never meant to be an Assassin and became the shitlord we know him today. I enjoy this being a factor in the series because if the Assassin's were always doing the right thing 100% of the time, that wouldn't be very realistic. But yes I agree with you and James in every way. Just wanted to throw this out. Keep up the great work Fizhy.
Cheers for the support man! The video isn't a criticism, I'm just pointing it out for what it is. I'm sure this extremist look was intentional.
Fizhy I love overthinking stuff like this, but I always thought this theory made too much sense. Thanks for the reply Dude.
Don't stop there. The French assassins were assholes too
Yeah, Bellec was a fucking pisspot
I agree, but I wouldn't say Connor is a shitlord, well at least not canonically. He was the only assassin never to kill a civilian, and initiated a rebirth of the order. As a character he had a lot of issues but he was by no means awful; and you can see Ubisoft tried to do something different
Haytham Kenway feels like the James Bond of Assassin's creed...it's sad that we didn't get a full game from him...
I think this also extends to European assasins. Let's remember how dogmatic was the france brotherhood, and the england brotherhood (Syndicate) practically leaving Henry alone to deal with the templars.
I dare say Connor is the only Colonial Assassin I can think of that achieves any kind of clarity and wisdom by the end of his adventure. At least he doesn't remain ignorant his whole life (which pains me even more when I listen back to his cut speech from AC3. Ubi REALLY should have kept that in).
8:01 he realizes the american revolution actually happened right
What, in his speech, indicated he doesn't? He says that it *might* have been avoided in *this* universe.
I can agree on the fact the Colonial Brotherhood didn't have the brotherhood values at their core, they were more extreme and were to focus on keeping the artifacts from the Templar's then fighting for the people. But at the same time (SOME) of their actions are understandable. 1. The gangs of New York had the Assassin symbol on their flags, bad idea (yes) but it shows that the Colonial Brotherhood "CB" were overconfident, pretty much saying "hey were over here if you want to fight" to the Templar's which they probably already knew. 2. CB not believing in shay after he destroyed a city and then tried to kill him. Well shay was still a young recruit into the brotherhood and they probably thought he did something wrong, and when shay was taking the manuscript (in Achilles eyes) that's knowledge to important to lose or fall into wrong hands so they were willing to do anything. But in the end it was Achilles fault For not sending Liam with shay, and for not just sitting down with shay and listing to him. (well Achilles did lose his family so understandable why he was in a bad mood). 3. Connor killing the Templar's and starting a war. Well Connor only did what he was told by Achilles "to kill the Templars" which did kind of start a war, but in the end it was better for America because they weren't under the Templars influence. 4. "Assassin Pride" which is very true they all had it but what do you suspect? if you are constantly being told "you are the Good guys". After all i feel like AC 3 and Rogue main points was trying to show us AC is not as black and white as we think it is. The Assassins and Templars aren't perfect, both sides have flaws and great thing about them. The Colonial Brotherhood was like the italian brotherhood until Ezio restarted it over with the assassin main values, which happened when connor took over it.
The Colonial Brotherhood was written as a bunch of bastards, making it easier for the player to fight and kill them later on.
Yep
aquilles??
I’ve never played rogue, but Adewale was great in black flag. (as a character and as a person) He realized Edward was greedy and only cared about wealth and fame, not caring about who he hurt, and he realized he was complicit in that. When he realized that, he left and joined the assassins.
Connor was mistaken because he was driven by revenge, he only wanted to kill Charles Lee in a way, but saw that he had to kill Haythams associates first. In my opinion, John Pitcairn was the only templar (Alongside Haytham) that had a point, Pitcairn didn't want to kill people, he wanted a protest/conference in order to settle things up with the colonies. Other associates had bad points, Thomas Hickey and Nicolas Biddle being two of them, but at the end it was Connor who made several mistakes.
Remember when Haytham read the letter from Washington and Connor said "How I don't know you've been holding this information from me"? Well, even if Haytham told him early, Connor woulda wind up saying "You're just trying to turn me against the assassin's".
Now, I honestly think Haytham became less mercyless as he grew up older, seen that he started killing men who didn't needed to be killed, yet, he is still correct in his ways since by what we know, Connor has killed many redcoats before.
Edit: There is also a funny fact and that is that Achilles never told Connor about what the previous Assassins did or the mistakes of them, this is seen when Connor is imprisoned in New York and Charles Lee tells him "I tought we eliminated all of your kind" Connor mistook "kind" as race, thinking Charles was talking about the Mohawk, but Charles Lee meant to the colonial Assassins
The assassins in Rogue are corrupt. I'm glad Shay was able to see through them, and joined the Templar's.
Yeah Colonial Brotherhood under Achilles is similar to Al Muallim in Masyaf (AC1) & Bellec in France (AC: Unity)
Haytham is a better assassin than Achilles
MadCAP That is the point.
TEMPLAR
Templar
For 3 sequences, Haytham felt like an anti-hero more than an antagonist.
I always assumed things like the flags and constantly wearing very distinctive outfits was simply a gameplay thing, and not representative as to how it actually happened. I think in AC1 (its been a while some maybe I am wrong) they mention that the animus works like a VR game, taking the memories and making them an interactive (within limits) experience, rather then a really immersive movie. Perhaps the animus is simply replacing the constant changing of outfits for a single set of clothes (for the same reason it doesn't bother to show sleeping/eating/bathroom/etc. It could also be replacing the subtle hidden signs assassins use to identify themselves and their hideouts for the blatent flags as a way to convey the location/identity of assassins to the user, who would have the training or experience to recognize them in reality.
11:03
The first tenet of the assassins:*exists*
Connor: Let’s kill doggo
It's the only domestic animal cuz it reveals their location. If you have ac3, try killing a cow or street dog
I think the reason the assasins in ac rogue were obvious was because shay knows how to identify an assassin
That’s why Shay is my hero ❤️
Connor came to fix Achilles mess I love him too ♥️
Shay would be proud of Connor
i agree 100% with all you said,but they're not the only example we have of assassins breaking the creed's tenets.Ezio from revelation killed innocents 5 times in the game.
1.Ezio trying to get into that janisary fort.Ezio in order to enter the fort made civilients break the front door for him,wich signaled ottoman soldiers to come and attack them.there's no way many people didn't die there.
2.Ezio killing Tarik without really knowing what he's up to
3.Ezio blowing up a cave
4.Ezio burning an entire fleet in wich probably there were some innocents(and even if there weren't it was somewhat fucked up,ezio in his younger days saved a bad guy from being burned alive by quickly stabbing him)
5.Ezio exploading a lighthouse.
Watch his top 5 examples of assassins breaking the tenets, you see that he puts ezio there
Flowie Altair did the same thing Broke the tenets of creed he even killed a innocent old man at the beginning of the game so
Dionisis Makrigiannis true ezio did probably kill 5 innocent people but he didnt kill 100 thousand innocent people like the american assassins.
Dionisis Makrigiannis ezio killed an entire city in revelations
Would you rather have a dude screaming in pain as he dies slowly on a burning stake, or have him die quickly so that he may have no pain, the choice is yours..
This thing does overstate a few things. William Johnson ignored the natives when they decided not to go along and basically told them they could either work with him or die. Even Haytham admits that in hindsight he can understand why Connor killed him shay also failed to learn; achilles did learn (hence why he desperately tries to keep connor from making his mistakes
Something I've never understood : why are we raising a gang in Syndicate (even if it's only Jacob's idea) that ultimatly leads to some bloody events in 1886 ? I mean, in the book about Henry Green, it's clear that the twins know the history of Templars and Assassins, i'm quite sure they both have heroical figures of inspiration, so they must have known that a gang was the worst idea ever…
I caught the "assassins are kinda like terrorists even when you're an assassin" vibe playing rogue years ago. I know it must've been purely for story that way itd make sense and am easy transition to play as a Templar. But this video definitely expanded on how it actually wasn't just for story(or what I was talking about).
For the ppl out there saying that the Templar’s were British, they weren’t. They were helping the British in the war but that doesn’t necessarily mean they work for or are British, they both had there separate ways of doing things and kinda looking for different things also.
"The tenents are more what you'd call 'guidelines' than actual rules"
Ah yes, the Geneva Convention
Somebody sounds like a templar
Best comment so far.
Considering Templars are the wisest and smartest of the two, that's a good thing.
@@watashinihayumegaarimasu7609 Howd that end in AC3?
@@brandonflaherty131 it ended in death for the colonial Templars, what's your point?
Connor was just too strong for the Templars, although an old ass Haytham kicked his ass, and also, Haytham *let* Connor kill him, I don't think a genius tactician with the intention of winning would choke a man to death when he has hidden blades that he could use to kill Connor right then and there.
Hope planned to use poison gas on civilians. That's another violation of the first tenant
It makes sense that one of the most isolated assassin's brotherhoods would stray from the creed and begin acting as its own echo chamber. When it took so long to get there, i bet they weren't in constant contact with London or Paris, and those had enough on their hands with the french revolution and Napoleon.
Take a shot every time he says "assassins".
We'd all pass out
We all know that the Assassin's aren't that 'villain like' like in AC Rogue. But I think they did it on purpose because that's the way how Templars think about the Assassin's in general. They did a good job with that.
koekiaan and rogue was ugly templar Juhani Otso Berg propaganda. Which failed since his cruel, cold just like Haytham, and criticized Haytham's emotions for Edward and Connor even tho Berg did the same with his daughter.
@@W0LV1E45 headcanon, these are shay's genetic memories, as far as we know you can't edit them
Connor clearly meant well, he knew there was no stopping what was coming and thought he was siding with the "good guys" or maybe just the lesser of 2 evils.
I kind of liked the failures of his life and naive judgements he made. It was a strong reflection of the times and hypocracy of the revolution.
And the fact that he never allowed the reality of Haythams words break or dissuade him was admirable.
You know, you never hear anybody addressing the fact that Ezio also broke all 3 tenants.
Stay blade from the innocent- destroyed a Byzantine city knowing full well of the collateral damage, killed for the Medici with very vague justification (having 'ties' to the archbishop)
Hide in plain sight- flew the Assassin flag over Monterigioni, pulled off all kinds of spectacular shit in Constantinople.
Do not compromise the brotherhood- chose to spare Rodrigo for his own closure (which bites him in the ass), letting Michaletto; Ceasre's hitman live AFTER he poisoned somebody, handed over 5 first civ relics/ KEYS TO MASYAF to save his love interest
But all in the growth of the brotherhood and a message to the templars so it was for the greater good
I mean, Altair also broke all three tenants at the start of the game, Ubisoft back then focused on story and character development, in order to improve and build a greater Creed.
For the colonial assassin's, I don't see such things.
"Durrr we didn't kill people,the earthquake did"
But let me try to defend Connor for a bit(cause i like him). Yeah he has done stupid things like revealing the assassins to Washington,but skill wise,he is a golden example of an assassin. And he managed to bring the creed back to life.
I think the main reason why Connor kills all of the Templars even though they had noble intentions is not because they were just templars and "they were the bad guys". Remember that Connor had visions from Juno to look for achilles when he was young. And many years later, after Connor kills all of the templars he gets another vision from Juno saying that he's done well. After all it was juno who was controlling Connor so that he could get the key from the templars and hide it where only Desmond could find it. Connor was just doing that because of the visions he had.
Sure Juno never explicitly told Connor to kill the templars, she told him that there were bad guys in the colonies and he should look for the assassins, pretty sure she knew he would find achilles and be trained to kill the Templars
Adewale is Way to underrated he's one of my favorite assassins he couldnt to much damage tho, but he was more like a maroon leader
Altair: I'm gonna change my code to fit my situation and for my own safety...
Everyone: bravo master assassin good motive
Connor im gonna change my code to fit my situation and to protect my people hell I'll even sacrifice myself :)
Everyone: BaD ChArAcTeR!!!
tf are talking about? Altair changed the creed to fit his situation only in the beginning of the game, ffs the whole game is about Altair realizing he was wrong and changing for the better as an assassin and as human being while Connor doesn't give a crap about the creed, all his deeds are purely about revenge and unlike Ezio, who's motivation was basically the same at first, he doesn't change at all, at least not in the game
0:20
"This is coming from a narrative perspective, so opinions really don't factor into this"
0:26
"In this video, I'm going to be going over why I don't think the colonial assassins were really great assassins at all"
Disregarding that, there are a few issues with the claims made in the video.
1. Shay was not aware that touching the artifact would cause the earthquake, nor were the other assassins aware. Although the assassin were planning on finding other artifacts after Shay's defection, it was out of ignorance and only at the end of AC rogue did they realize what the artifacts truly caused.
2. AC Syndicate has the twins growing their own gang around London meant for intimidation and acting as a force against the Templars and their gangs; AC Rouge's assassin gangs act the same way, of controlling the colonies and going against the Templars with their british soldiers.
3. Shay brought harm to the brotherhood AFTER he defected. Connor never brought harm to the brotherhood, instead growing it by bringing in a few new members and harming the templars.
1st example: As you stated in a video months before this one, the assassins did not know that the interference with the sight in Lisbon directly caused the earthquake, instead just believing that Shay, being a "loose cannon" wasn't "delicate" enough and something went wrong, or along those lines. Only when Achilles saw the earthquake happen due to his own interference in the North did he realize what Shay was trying to tell him earlier in the game.
2nd example: Connor was focusing on protecting his own land. William Johnson, a templar, after trying to purchase the land diplomatically, proceeded to use violence to get the land. Connor was protecting his kin.
Connor was killing templars because they ARE the enemy. Assassins and Templars have been killing each other for as long as they existed. Both have different ideologies that come into conflict, in which Connor was doing what the assassins did best and kill the Templars to avoid their beliefs of firm control from coming into reality. The templars wouldn't have performed the "noble deeds" unless it benefited the Templars' beliefs in any way.
The American Revolution still would have started if Connor hadn't joined in. The Boston Tea Party still would have happened, and the Sons of Liberty still would have attempted to dump the tea into the harbor. Connor attempted to prevent the Boston Tea Party, he was protecting the Sons of Liberty during the Boston Tea Party, and he was giving assistance to the Militia with Paul Revere.
Even the Templars had an event leaning toward the Revolution, Shay protected Benjamin Franklin while he was a diplomat in France. Some believe that if the French hadn't joined the war with the early US, the 13 colonies wouldn't have gained its independence.
Both Connor and his father believe what they are doing (Connor with Assassins and Haytham with Templars) was correct. It makes complete sense that Connor refused to listen to Haytham when he was criticizing his ways.
The Assassins in Ac rogue are portrayed as villains is comparable to how the templars are portrayed in every other game. Ac rogue assassins are portrayed as villains coming from Shay's perspective, showing the Assassins are trying to control the artifacts which can't be controlled. In AC3, in Connor's eyes, he is trying to stop the Templars from taking harsh control over the new nation. In other games it's the same way: Ac1 Altair is trying to stop the Templars from controlling the Holy Land, ac2 Templars in Italy, Ac Unity with France, Ac Syndicate with London, etc.
12:00
"And this isn't opinion based ... this is just how it is"
That isn't what you said at 00:26, "I'm going to be showing you why I DON'T THINK"
There are many, many flaws in this video. It seems more like you made this video to attract views rather than give us a real interpretation of why the colonial assassins aren't as great as they seem to be. You've blown up and heavily exaggerated many details. The colonial assassins during Rogue were most likely portrayed the way they were to keep Ac Rogue more like an assassin game, since Shay sneaking around and assassinating is not seen any where else in the game to the same degree of Shay himself. You could cut out all the dialogue and replace the assassin flag textures with templars and just call Shay another assassin, and you have no difference with other games.
here comes the fun police
Another great example of them breaking the tennets is how Chevalier bombarded the homestead just to take down Shay. Surely, he should have realised that he would probably kill dozens of his own allies for only one potential enemy. Sounds like compromising the brotherhood to me.
I mean, to be fair, every assassin was terrible at hiding in plain sight. not only did they have the most noticeable and recognizable robes ever that any templar with a functioning brain cell will know instantly who they are, but if the robes weren't a dead give away they have their assassin insignia decorated on their robes. so even a brain dead templar would be able to recognize any assassin out in the streets, that's why social stealth never made much sense to me
I think Connor will be a better mentor than Achilles ever was. He would train his students under the right principles he believes in, and maybe even some of his father's principles since you can see in Connor's speech he had deep respects for his dad even if he was a templar. He will be the one to forge a new colonial brotherhood much better than the one Achilles had.
The main disagreement I have are regarding Libson and the Revolution. Libson was an accident pure and simple. The Assassins had no intention of starting that earthquake. Had Shay simply communicated what exactly happened instead of running in there kicking and screaming like a child, they may have listened to him. Shay was a kid racked with guilt and PTSD and Monroe saw this and took advantage. The Assassins bullying people and taking houses, that's another thing and what the game should've focused on. Though it came across more as underlings being drunk on power more than anything else.
Second, the Templars in AC1 also had noble reasons, doesn't mean they shouldn't have died. The assassins are about freedom of will. The colonial Templars were trying to manipulate the people into a false peace as they always do. Revolution would've happened either way because of their lack of representation in the British parliment and the lack of communication about the reasons for their taxation.
Adron Duell a kid that kicked their asses (shay)
Your wrong. Obviously the assassins wanted to start the earthquakes that killed thousands of people.
@@donaldoduckus6566 are they maniacs? Or is it just you? What advantage assassins get if they destroy a city?
@@donaldoduckus6566 you played a lot of ac rogue apparently. That game is portrayed from a Templar pov. Anything assassins do may find evil for us. Just like things Templars did find evil to us in other games
To be fair the assassin didn't know that would cause an earth quake
well the roles of the "villains" did kinda reversed after shay bitchyness i guess the reason why Achilles became a depress old man cause he believed the templars won cause he came to regret his choices for his rite and felt a spark of redemption after Connors worthiness
Its called shitty writing. Instead of calming down, explains what happened carefully, Shay did the dumbest thing and accuses Achilles for purposely making him kill innocents which he didn't and later stole the manuscript. It all could have been avoided if he calmed down, listen to reason but his arrogance took over.
@@W0LV1E45 you think Shay would calmed the fuck down after demolishing one of the world's largest cities, killed nearly 100,000 people, and caused the largest tsunami ever recorded at the time? Maybe if he's someone like Hitler, he'll calm the fuck down.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 maybe
@@alexanderchristopher6237 I love how being calm is associated with hitler..sigh the stupidity
I like how Connor can run a better Brotherhood than Achilles the well trained assassin... And I'm fairly certain Connor didn't reveal himself as an assassin to George...
I've always liked the idea of an extremist branch of the Assassin Brotherhood. It gives back the moral ambiguity of the Assassin-Templar war that earlier games tried to explore. Al Mualim from the first game is already a perfect blueprint for a compelling AC villain.
1. They didn't know what was going to happen in Lisbon in ac rogue. They go hunting for another site as they didn't believe Shay, but when Achilles gets there, he realises Shay is right and doesn't touch it.
2. This is breaking a strictue so not much to say for this, however everyone loves ezio and his games yet what about brotherhood? Where you had the same, taking over Templar bases and showing the assassin's emblem. That deserves the same criticism the colonial assassin's are recieving too
3. Going off of ac 1, compromise the brotherhood means put it in danger, like Altair bringing the templars to their base or putting their own in danger, which technically they didn't do.
Extra. Connor killed templars as he thought Charles Lee and the others burned down his village and, although the templars tried to help, they did it in a wrong way ( like William Johnson killing locals to gain their land )
Sorry for the long response, I just love the colonial games and believe that they do deserve criticism, but also love as they are good games
Thank you
There's a fine line between the two orders that's what makes the games plots interesting. Remember when ahmet confronting ezio, haytham confronting Conner?
Fizhy, to be honest with you, AC3 for it's fantastic and good at the same time but also doesn't mean it's bad; look, I get it but please bear with me that the Colonial Assassin's back then are that stupid and broke the 3 tenants of the Creed itself and for Connor? Come on man, you're better that this! Connor is still a kind, gentle, and cool guy but also being brutal, a killing machine, and a loyal follower to his beliefs. And TBH, there's reasons why nearly all the AC fans hated/disliked Desmond and Connor for being boring and such...
I feel like Chivalier is an exaggerated example of one of the two greatest issues with the whole Brotherhood. Chivalier was an arrogant and cruel man who seemed more interested in exploring and looting than actually being an Assassin. But unlike Edward, Chivalier was extremely prideful of his role as an Assassin, and extremely aggressively belittled Shay for not living up to the Brotherhood when Chivalier himself regularly spat in its face.
There is only one way I see the Brotherhood accepting a man like this and giving him so much power. Family. We know Assassins traditionally train their children and induct them into the Brotherhood. That's almost certainly how Chivalier was brought in. And we know he came from an incredibly rich and prestigious French family. They must have also been Assassisn. So essentially the Assassins awarded an incredibly high rank to a spoiled brat (with a completely delusional sense of righteousness) just because of his wealth and family ties.
At the exact same time, the Assassins *completely* ignored the protege they had at their disposal. That was Shay. It's obvious that Shay is their most skilled operative given that he received no additional training after defecting and yet managed to slaughter the entire Colonial Brotherhood. Their issue with him is that he lacks discipline and wisdom, but all they do is belittle him and point that out, rather than actually educating and training him. And this demonstrates the other huge issue. They had it too easy. In Ezio and Edward's time, the Assassins were pushed to the brink of extinction in their respective regions of the world. There wasn't a single resource they didn't take advantage of. For example, in Black Flag they were forced to ally with and use Edward, when every single one of them (aside from Mary) would have preferred to kill him. The result was that eventually Edward came around and wholeheartedly dedicated himself to the Brotherhood.
I think Achilles was another Assassin brought in through family, or at least when he was inducted, his training was far more focused on the traditions and supposed infallibility of the Assassins. At the same time he was placed into a far greater position of power than any Mentor we have previously seen. Achilles demonstrates an attitude he later passed to Connor. Templars are the enemy. End of story. The Brotherhood was never founded to fight the Templars. It was founded to fight injustice and bring freedom. Achilles acts like he's having a competition, not determining the future of humanity. The Templars want a piece of Eden? Well then the Assassins need *ALL* of the pieces of Eden. No questions. Achilles could have burned the manuscript and destroyed the precursor box, ensuring those pieces of Eden were never found. And the whole time he never questioned his own morality, as he was clearly raised to believe that everything he did was right by default because he was an assassin.
It is a recycled version of the previous incarnation of Jedi Order. The Colonial Brother refused to evolve. If one ever tried to reform the group, he/she would be hit with a sush order. I do believe Achilles had a large hand in Shay's falling to the darkside. If Achilles had been more open to the older teachings, he would not have given Haytham an opportunity to bring about the Templar. If the Brotherhood of old realised Shay was correct then that could have alieviated the problems and suffering the Americas felt and possibly reunite the Assassins and Templar into one balanced order, a notion Connor tried to reconcile with despite Achilles' protests.
Connor was killing templars because a vision told him "Do it or your village will suffer" and what happens next?
He kills them all and the village still suffers. There was no loyalty in there only interest
Miguel Lopes when your sped
You should make a video about what would have happened if Shay finished off Achilles when Haytham shot him in the knee, at the end of Assassin's Creed Rogue. Achilles would have not been around to train Connor into becoming an Assassin. And what you said in this video, the entire American Revolution could have been stopped if Shay just killed Achilles.
Wait wait, did u mentioned Connor, when does he comprise brotherhood, when did he killed innocent, 🤔🤔🤔
He said that the other assassins (AKA the colonial assassins in AC Rogue) killed some innocents and TOOK A HOSTAGE, A RANDOM, INNOCENT HOSTAGE TO LURE OUT SHAY
@@lazercrusher48 actually the developers themselves acknowledged that Connor is the only assassin to not kill innocents
@@camm3217 and when did Ezio killed innocents? I mean sure, Altair, Edward, Shay, all these boys defenetly killed innocents, but the others? not so sure...
Mr.chern Ezio killed dozens in revalations by lighting a city on fire
@@ariqrahman2022 did he? shit I haven't played this game in a while so I guess that explains why I forgot that... still what of the others, Arno, that chick from liberation, Bayek? (haven't played all this games so can't tell) and although there's been a while since I played AC3 but if I remember correctly Connor did kill innocents in that sequence where he killed his father
I recently played through AC Rogue and the one thing I just couldn't get over was that the assassins... well they weren't really the assassins like in the other games.
I expected rogue to be the greyest AC game but instead the assassins were just straight up villians using chemcial warfare on civilian
I don’t blame the Assassins for the earthquakes. They didn’t know specifically that the artifacts caused the earthquakes, and at the end when Achilles gets incontrovertible evidence that removing the artifacts cause earthquakes, he says Shay was right and doesn’t take it. It’s baffling that people forget this part of the story. Achilles mistakenly assumed that Shay must have done something wrong and let his war against the Templars obscure putting two and two together. He ends up making the right choice at the end and doesn’t sacrifice any lives, so I can’t put the earthquakes against the Assassins as an example of them flouting the Creed since they weren’t aware.
You can't use Lisbon as an example, they didn't know that would happen, it was an accident. "Stay Your Blade From The Flesh of The Innocent" means don't intentionally kill bystanders to further the goals of the Brotherhood, not "never kill anyone ever".
The idea that anyone thinks Lisbon counts as breaking one of the tenets is absolutely asinine.
They were, indeed, a wrongdoing generation of the Brotherhood. The Colonial Templars had the old views of the Brotherhood in mind, Peace in All Things, and that's what the Brotherhood changed in their goals. Haytham, seeing this, converted Shay to the Order, and also tried the same with Ratonhnhaké;ton/Connor, but felt there was no convincing Connor, and tried killing him. Also, it was not Shay's fault for Lisbon's destruction, for he had no knowledge of what the fuck would happen. He just followed Achilles, his mentor's, orders. So, yes. They were an evil representation of the Brotherhood.
11:01 stray your blade from the innocent Fizhy THAT INCLUDES DOGS YOU MONSTER!
Couldn't abstergo have edited the footage from AC Rouge at all?
Nah they were going through it for the first time in the game.
Fizhy Ah, nevermind all that then.
SnD God AC RED?
I don't understand the example of 'if Connor wasn't hasty, the American Revolution wouldn't have happened' even though it wasn't really Connor's fault the colonies wanted freedom. Haytham literally wanted Washington dead so he could replace him with a Templar that would rule over them like the king of England. That was a very poor example of Connor killing innocents
Achilles didn't manipulate Connor because both and Achilles were told by Juno to pursue the Artifacts and keep them away from Templars...Juno did manipulate Connor especially...
Although Charles Lee didn't burn his village, he didn't save it either...
Templars weren't good either..so Achilles telling Connor to kill Templars isn't a bad thing...