He wasn't villainous, he was just blinded by the creed, he was an extremist, he just wanted to not let the templars get their hands on the artifacts and have the assassins get them first, no matter the cost, even if it was for the greater good, he couldn't see the destruction he was causing, only Shay was able to see through it because he experienced it first hand.
That’s not an excuse, if anything, it’s a motivation or reason for his villainy. Yet again, if thinking critically, it depends on what point of view you look at Achilles from.
he literally knew it happened in Haiti, still sent Shay, and then denied it to Shay's face. Fuck Achilles, only good thing we got out of him was Connor.
Between organized crime, large scale production of biochemical weapons in the middle of population centers, and hell having the Brotherhood insignia plastered on gang flags all over the place, I'm pretty sure every tenet of the assassins had been violated back to back.
"In your haste to save the world, boy, take care you don't destroy it." ~ Achilles to Connor After having played Rogue and seen Achilles' mistakes as the Mentor of the Colonial Brotherhood in that game, those words in AC3 are now more meaningful.
If what I read was right, it was said that AC3, 4, R and U were written about the same time (note: written but not necessarily under development). Which is why this group of games were almost always supplementing each other one way or another, and one such example include William Miles mentioning to Desmond that there were attempts of collaboration between Templers and Assassins previously, implying what happened in Unity's Arno and Elise.
@@stormmeansnowork Honestly, I feel like AC 1-Revelations were great tie in because it gave Altair closure as well as Ezio, however 3-Unity didn't give closure for anyone. I feel like Ubisoft could make a game out of the middle and ending parts and close Arno, Connor and Shay's story. Or maybe even make another game after centered around Connor's daughter and Shay's son.
Yea connor is just built different, they basically just decided to give him superpowers, and in the dlc just said fuck it and stopped even trying to hide it
I can imagine Haytham being easily taken down by 18yr old Connor while He wasnt injured. Let me explain ▶️ so Connor at 13yr old is able to beat Adults soldiers + Jeggers (Jeggers are high trained best of best soldiers) Haytham would be a joke for 18yr old Connor
What I find interesting is that Achilles fall to the same problem Altair fell to, pride and arrogance. The difference is when in their life it happened and how they dealt with it. For Achilles, it was a little to late to change and grow, as such, he became a hermit filled with gilt and remorse (maybe)
I feel with the situation with Shay defecting is both on Achilles and Shay. Achilles should have listened to Shay about Lisbon rather than dismiss him but also Shay should have explained what the artifact he saw looked like to make Achilles realize that it wasn't an Apple of Eden rather than immediately deciding to steal the book and run plus Achilles didn't know messing with the precursor artifacts are what caused the earthquakes.
@@digivagrant They are portrayed as very incompetent. Between having a flag with the assassin insignia raised in gang hideouts when they are supposed to be keeping their Brotherhood hidden and using poison gas on New York and allying with bandits even though they're not supposed to harm innocents.
@@JL32506 It's like how Hollywood props up their weal female protagonists by making male pro/antagonists dumb r incompetent 🤔 I dont think they can pull a KOTOR with just one small dlc
@@JL32506 Agreed. One of my biggest complaints with Rogue is how evil the Assassins are: Poisoning New York, allying with bandits, attacking General Monro's men even after they surrender, leaving Monro in a burning building, etc.
@@timgonzalesjr5346 The two refer to different things. If they were the same, there would be no reason to have both words. An antagonist is a character or plot device that acts as an obstacle for the protagonist. Nothing more, nothing less. A villain is an evil or immoral character with malicious intent. Not all antagonists are villains. Not all villains are antagonists. You can have a villain protagonist. You can have an antagonist that isn't necessary evil or has malicious intent. Stories are very often more nuanced than just "pure evil" vs "pure good". In fact, all good modern stories are more nuanced than this basic duality.
Achilles was the catalyst for Conner's story and one could say that Achilles used Conner but at the same time Conner wanted revenge for his mother's death and the destruction of his home/village. They killed 2 birds with one stone and changed history at the same time.
Achillies was human prone to mistakes his flaws was not listening to Shay and i am sure thats why he didnt want to take in Connor as a Assassin given he made a mistake once. I think he worries he would make another mistake and repeat what happened with Shay.
Yea I think that's why hes truly depressed in ac3 .I didnt realize Connor was 13 until now.haytham just manipulated shay by helping him after hea shipwrecked and goes to nyc.he was vulnerable.
@@kaycred3361 Not ship wrecked he had a assassins falling out and fell off a cliff. However yes i feel shay was manipulated into joining the templars. The templars acted more with the creed to make Shay feel he more belonged there.
You can't really say "he's just human and humans make mistakes" when his mistakes costed thousands of innocent people their lives and an entire city destroyed, all because he was too stupid and arrogant to believe Shay.
@@vengeance1450logic failure lol. Achilles "not believing" in Shay is not what caused the earthquake. Nothing Shay said prior to Lisbon could have prevented that. Achilles was reacting emotionally to Shay unnecessary rant. To win an argument, you should not lead with your emotions and anger. People stop listening when that happens. Shay is a flawed character even worse than Achilles. Achilles, when calm, acknowledge Shay was right about the artifact. That shows growth and maturity
Great video! About the analogy with Star Wars, I always saw Achilles as master Yoda. He was Grand Master of the Jedi order, he was unable to see the fall of the order, he gave up and also he didn't want to train Luke in TESB, just like Achilles. In my opinion he is much closer to Yoda than Obi-Wan. But either way you can relate him to whoever you like. Keep up the good work! (Sorry for spoilers)
Yeah I totally get it I originally wanted to say Yoda as well since he was like the “mentor” and went off into hiding. Ultimately I went with Obi Wan because obi wan taught Luke about what the force and Jedi were like how Achilles taught Connor who the assassins were. But I definitely understand your point and think it makes perfect sense. Thank you for watching and the kind words. I hope you have a good rest of your day!
I believe that Shay is Anakin, from prequels (He betrayed his allegiance and became a big member to the enemy order) and Haytham is Vader from original (A fight against father and son from two different orders), but only he wasn't redeemed at the end. I believe he's a Star Wars inspired character and that's why AC3 appeals more to me.
@@sofo66Shay's defection to the Templars is highly reminiscent of Anakin's, while his role in the Order is akin to Starkiller's role as Darth Vader's right hand.
In Rogue, I would say yes (but not to a great level), in AC3 I don't really think there is a 'villain' and this is honestly what I like about AC3's story, in that despite the Templars are the 'bad guys', Haytham's ideologies makes you really think about it and there's times I just had to agree with him
There is a villain and Haytham is wrong. Why people didn't listen to what he literally says? Yes, he is well written and charismatic. He is also a genocidal prick willing to destroy entire cultures in order to control the world. All his final discourse is quite ironic because he accuses the assassins of things that are also what templars do, including the fact that there will always be assassins because people will always rise against obsessive control and tyranny, and how templars do indoctrinate people and are also dominated by old man who want power.
I think he substituted grief for arrogance after his wife and kid died. Grief may have made him look weak as a leader, but the hole in his heart was still there even if he thought he had to be the leader. Simply a wrong mindset. That hole manifested as anger first, but when he was questioned/challanged on his leadership that anger turned to ignorance and arrogance.
I always felt the whole story and the people involved (Achilles and Hathem, Conner and Shay) were all showing that neither side is bad, that both sides are good. One side fights for freedom, the other for peace. Both are noble goals. What makes one bad over the other is how far they will go, and how much of the other's goal they are willing to give up for their own. The assassin's become bad when they use terrorism (like in rogue with the gas) and the Templars when they use tyranny. Ultimately both exist so that the other doesn't take things too far unchallenged. Also the Obi Wan analogy was the perfect analogy. I knew it as soon as he said his name
Not just Achilles but the whole Colonial Brotherhood under him were consumed by this weird arrogance that no other brotherhood had. They believed they were better than everyone, and could do as they pleased. They even looked down on Shay like some peasant for some weird reason, despite obviously being incredibly talented. They used him like dumb muscle. Even that native american within their ranks treated Shay like garbage - you'd think he would understand what it's like to be treated that way most of all... Though, this was probably more a flaw in the writing to force you to feel alienated from them.
Shay was just a whelp man, how do you expect them to treat him? He has to prove himself, that's what his task was, in that he fucked up and blamed,yelled and also stole from his brothers without even giving them some time and talk about what happened, Shay is just reckless.
@aswinraj_ar Holy shit you're coping hard. The game actively shows you Achilles wasn't gonna happen and planned on destroying more cities. Tell me, why couldn't Achilles ask Shay why exactly he'd steal it? A good master would do that.
@@aswinraj_ar If you got 30,000 people killed all because you were asked to retrieve an artifact, I think you’d be rightfully pissed at the people who asked for you to get it.
Great analysis, Achilles is only ever an antagonist or anti-villain at most, than a true villain. And after all that he really ascends into a truly wise mentor (loved the Obi-wan analogy). I feel there is this crucial scene in Rogue that most everyone forgets... when Adewale comes to visit Achilles and Shay listens in on that conversation, they mention the Haiti earthquake as a separate random event from their agent going into the temple to retrieve the artefact. Meaning they didn't know that's what caused the earthquake. Then, after Lisbon, when Shay went in all screaming and guns blazing and accused Achilles of causing all that death deliberately, Achilles simply refused to believe it because the idea he and the Assassins had been killing thousands was probably too much to handle at that point in his life given his own personal losses. Not to mention Achilles had just gathered supplies for Adewale to take to Haiti on a relief mission and suddenly he is the reason everyone died in Lisbon. So I think he just spiraled into denial until the very end of Rogue, when he finally admitted to Liam that Shay was right and refused to handle the artefact in the Arctic temple. Achilles also saved Shay's life when Liam went to shoot him. So all in all, by the time of AC3 Achilles was just a heap of guilt and self-loathing, he even told Connor he despised himself for never mustering the courage to kill himself. I think Shay was so traumatised by Lisbon that he didn't communicate well what he learned, and Achilles was not prepared to accept the tragedy he caused, so like you said that entire plot hinges on one massive misunderstanding.
I mean the other point towards achiles is that there were no pieces of eden shown prior to rogue that caused such levels of destruction before. so a piece of eden being able to literally quake the earth to that degree was just completely unheard of, even hope who explicitly has been stated to study these things didn't believe it.
Translation: They let their emotions override their sense of reason and went spiraling into idiotic conflict. Then, authoritarians took in one of them and spoonfed them authoritarian ideology after he became lost.
@@DarkEdgePrince true, it's Templar ideology and lies and Shay totally fell for it... when Shay was with the Assassins he knew they never "terrorised people" like Col. Munro claimed. Only the Templars called the Assassins gangs of criminals. Basically every "gang HQ" Shay destroyed was in fact an Assassin bureau. That's what we see in AC Revelations or in Black flag when Ezio or Edward must defend the Assassin dens, only here we see it from the Templars' PoV. Even at the beginning when assassins break into the Finnegans' house we never learn what they were really there for, all we know is that the Finnegans have strong ties to the Templars. Shay sided with the Templars out of gratitude and he never stopped to question the lies he was told even when those lies contradicted everything he knew of the Assassins.
Thank you!!! Everyone seems to forget that when Achilles saw what the artifacts actually were he told Liam to stand down and prevented him to shoot Shay. Achilles was a flawed mentor but he was not evil. He believed he was preventing the Templars to obtain powerful ISU artifacts, not causing earthquakes. And we all know what the Templars do with the Pieces of Eden. Shay literally screamed to him he was a murderer, but he couldn't know what the Temples were before he saw with his own eyes. Achilles redeemed himself by training Connor who was essential for Desmond to save the world from the second Solar Storm.
7:59 i don't think Achilles failed with shay at least not in terms of making him an assassin and teaching him the creed because shay was the ONLY person during the events of rogue who actually didn't break the tenants of the creed
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
In rogue his actions were villainous If anything I don’t think hes fully villainous like the Borgias type of evil He was mostly blinded by his own delusion that he knew best and had he had listen to Shay then he wouldn’t have sided with the templars to save the assassins from his stupidity and ignorance But he did redeem himself somewhat in training Connor and took him as practically another son figure with how close they were for such a short time
Truth be told idk if i would say villainous more like unenlightened at the time he likely felt the pieces of Eden were like the apple. Thus they had to be kept from the templars. Ask me someone should of accompanied Shay that Achillies trusted more. Or Achillies should of went with him himself then maybe they would of seen the threat they held.
I would say he is a villian in Rogue but in AC3's timeline he redeemed himself. Kinda like Rodrigo Borgia in AC2 and Brotherhood, he was a villian in 2 but really wasn't in Brotherhood. I see everyone saying "humans make mistakes" which is true but when your mistakes lead to thousands of deaths that's too far and unforgiveable in my opinion.
Wow, this video really got me thinking! The idea that Achilles could be the real villain in Assassin's Creed is mind-blowing. I've always seen him as a legendary hero, but this analysis makes some compelling points. The game's ability to challenge our perceptions of historical figures is truly remarkable. The way the narrative unfolds and the moral ambiguity surrounding Achilles' actions really adds depth to the story. Kudos to the creator for shedding light on this intriguing perspective. It's discussions like these that make the Assassin's Creed franchise so thought-provoking and engaging. Can't wait to see more content like this!
Loved the SW comparison you made. Have you ever considered doing a full nlown video comparing the Colonial Brotherhood's downfall to that of the prequel era Jedi? Lots of comparisons of both Orders becoming more arrogant and screwing over a young pupil with so much potential to where they get manipulated into switching sides and kill those they once saw as family. Hell you could say Achilles is the AC version of Yoda being a stubborn yet traumatized old man who refuses to train him at first but gives in and eventually dies peacefully seeing Connor become a fully fledged Assassin akin to Yoda and Luke.
After playing rogue I started reading the Assassin creed book forsaken which is basically the life of Haythem seen through a diary perspective just after the end credit scene of black flag till him finding out about Connor. Which adds a lot more character development to haythem and his struggles too.
The Beauty of the Kenway Saga is it's subtlety, and only those most perceptive and attentive piece it all together. Its why i love the kenway saga, it all comes together when you play 3-unity. It all overlaps.
ACIII is probably my favorite Assassin's Creed game. I always liked learning about that time period as a kid, but I think the thing that the game captures better than any other media about this time period is just how murky everything is in terms of morals. Yes, it's a good thing that the people in the colonies were able to free themselves from the oppression of the King, but those same people would go on to enslave an entire race of people and commit genocide against another. I think making the protagonist of the game a native was the right choice, because it unfortunately reflects the truth that so many native people fought alongside the colonists in pursuit of the promise of peace, only for their tribes to be betrayed and slaughtered by the very people they helped to gain independence. As for Achilles himself, the fact that he's a land-owning black man tells us a lot about his life that the game never does because of historical context. All the game needs to tell us is that he's a land-owning black man in colonial times and we can look in the history books to see how he has most likely been treated ever since he came to the colonies. I honestly think, when it comes to the characters of ACIII (and Rogue when they appear in that game) it's a disservice to refer to them as "Heroes" and "Villains" because it's story, like the history of the US, is a lot more complicated and nuanced than that.
Yeah. AC3, Liberation, and Rogue may be In my top 5 favorite settings due to this reality in the games. AC3 in particular due to the many conflicts taking place at once.
This is about as good a synopsis of a game I have ever read. It is insightful and very thoughtful especially in reference to that period in our nation's history. Brilliantly stated!
These 2 games are the most emotionally of the series, I mean when you see Achilles mentor for Shay and then Connor it’s just crazy, first you have to destroy everything that have been built by Achilles only because of his stubbornness, then you rebuilt everything with Connor who do everything right, yeah Achilles got his redemption by training Connor but I thing above all when he was training Connor he was thinking about vengeance from Haytham first then about the creed. But man these two games are the best for me, they made me litteraly cry every time (Ezios 3 games excluded)
I think shay actually saved the assassin's from becoming like the templars all he had to do was make the assassins start over and he was the one that said to spare achilleas.
Maaaan you are the best Assassin's Creed content creator in UA-cam !!! I love ur videos and i can understand how much you love ac with your creative videos🔥🔥
I really feel like (even though it never was mentioned) that Achilles was trying to find the pre cursors in order to bring his wife and child back. I think Achilles was a really broken guy (I mean before Haytham blew his kneecap apart) I feel a sense of sorrow for him. Yet also playing as Shay you truly realize just how wrong he was but by the time of 3 he is a broken (literally broken he can barely walk) old man that sees this young boy in need of his help and he takes him under his wing. Connor and His father/son relationship is one of the greatest relationships in Assassins creed. I still think Haytham’s character arc is the saddest it’s right as AC 4 ends you see this happy little boy with his father excited to see a show at an opera. Practically right after this is Edward’s death and then he’s taken by The Order and forced into the life of a Templar and in a way he had to really push how far he was into the order because of his lineage they would have killed him instantly if he spoke out. Yet at the end of the day all these stories tie in together in various ways it’s pretty amazing.
I'm playing through Rogue and feel the same. Its cool seeing areas from AC 3 before they became war torn; Connor is pretty much undoing what Shay did when he destroys many of The Templar bases. But the story baffles me a bit especially with how many different factions are at play, especially the gang strongholds. If I hadn't played AC3 first, I would think Achailles is a straight up evil villian despite the throw away line about his family. The assassin's straight up hold innocent natives hostage in this game and pretty much do vile stuff we've seen the Templar do in older games. Even though assassin's like Ezio hang out with hired mercenaries, thieves, and the like, he never had them straight up target innocent people like in Rogue. Personally I don't think there's a villian at all. I feel like the games were trying to paint the Templar vs assassin's conflict as grey, but feel like Rogue could have done better at it. We see Shay having doubts about what's right and wrong, but so far in the game I haven't seen the gray area from the Templar, though maybe AC3 is doing it kind of with Haythems pov.
i see rogue as, Achilles didn't want to believe Shay, because Achilles sees the assassin's as the protectors of the people, and after hearing that instead they destroyed a city Achilles may of thought Shay was lying at first and was corrupted there and then
Great video man, I'm not sure if there is a villain in rogue and maybe not in 3 either, I think ur analogy to the Trifecta of Obi,Ani,Luke and Achilles,Shay,Connor is actually pretty good, it sat with me till the end of the vid. It's almost like shay was the untapped potential that Achilles made an honest human mistake with and Connor was his retribution. Nice video tho I enjoy stuff like this, I know it's all theory but it's good stuff
Some factions were worse than others. The Templars that Ezio faced in his lifetime were truly the scum of the earth. The one's in syndicate were just really a product of the times, but they weren't moral. Unity, also evil.
I couldn’t believe it when I realized he was named “Achilles” and he had a limp, which reminded me of the “Achilles’ Heel” thing. His weakness was being blinded by his extremism and pride, which resulted to his injury on his leg, a reminder of how he lost his creed due to his weaknesses. I like Achilles and Ratohnhaké:ton’s dynamic and felt so empty when Achilles passed away. Somehow the Davenport area felt something was missing despite the side quests and a bunch of people living there.
I recently had an amazing idea for the next AC game but it’s a region I doubt will get any attention. Immediately following WW I and the Armenian genocide many of the Ottoman leaders responsible for the mass killings evaded persecution for their crimes. In order give them the punishment that the world failed to some Armenians created operation Nemesis (named after the Greek god of revenge) where they sent out assassins to kill certain Ottoman leaders. One assassin in particular Soghomon Tehlirian assassinated both Harutian Mgrditichian (an important member of the Ottoman secret police similar to the Nazi gustapo) and Talaat Pasha (minister of the interior for the Ottoman Empire and primary leader behind the genocide). He assassinated Harutian Mgrditichian in Instanbul and Talaat had fled to Berlin where he was tracked down and killed in the street. I think using Soghomon as a sort of outline for the protagonist and having the game take place across a few major cites rather than a large open world similar to AC 2 would be the setup for a very interesting game.
I've never been a huge fan of Achilles. He's not a badly written character, just a guy blinded by his position as mentor. He's at his lowest in Rogue of course, but he still wasn't great in AC3. The Templars tried multiple times to avoid war by using subtle means (Johnson buying native land, Pitcairn wanting to parley, etc), but Achilles made Connor believe they were irredeemibly evil, causing Connor to choose violence and escalate things. While the Templars are no saints, Haytham did try to connect with his son, and while I don't believe peace between the Brotherhood and Order would have been possible long-term, I do think Connor and Haytham could have made compromises for each other. But Achilles denies Connor that chance, and sets him on the path to kill his own father. After the Templars are gone, Connor has little left. His leg is badly messed up from the chase with Charles Lee, he had to kill his best friend, his people are forced to leave their territory, Juno tells him she just used him for her own needs... I think Achilles is partially responsible for Connor's misery. Had he not fueled Connor's hatred towards the Templars, and allowed Connor to negotiate with Haytham, things may not have ended so bleak. Connor essentially becomes another Achilles, a crippled man, living alone, haunted by doubt and sorrow. I can absolutely understand why Achilles did what he did, but what he did broke Connor.
I feel like the assassins through the 18th century lost what it meant to be an assassin. Not just Achillies. Achillies had his own personal traumas, but as seen in Unity, the Assassins globally weren't in the right headspace during that time. They were similar to what happened in Masyaf in AC1. They lost sight of safeguarding free will and protecting people and focused too much on being anti-templar and keeping first civ artifacts out of their hands. Their global network was also small while the world kept growing bigger. After the colonial assassins fell and other factions of that time also being shook up, everyone left around had to re-evaluate what it meant to be assassins and readjust themselves to the new world. Just like how Altair had to shift the Brotherhood's focus and methods in the codex. Meanwhile the Templars have remained consistent on their goal of attaining complete order and only view the assassin's as a nuisance. Their goal isn't to destroy the assassins, it was to take over. Which is why despite the repeated failed plans they would still be around. Because they focused on that larger goal, their ability to communicate to other branches was easier. They didn't have a fight for power unless someone became selfish. Everyone had their job and did it.
He was a radical just like Gamilat: the end justifies the means. But he admits that Shay was right. Just like Gamilat accepted his death as agreed with Bayek. And his role in reestablishing the assassins was vital.
It weird in AC 3 he looks like a hero a true master but in Rogue he just doesnt seem the same maybe in AC 3 he reflected on his actions and changed, a new man in AC 3 thats probably why he retired from the assassins too
The way I see it, there probably was a good reason for Achilles to become a master assassin and a mentor in the first place. He definitely didn't achieve that by killing his competition or doing something evil. I think that because Rogue is set in probably when the colonial assassins were the strongest and had many connections around the world, he just got too hasty and stopped caring about the basic rules of the brotherhood. The brutal isolation given to him by Shay/Haytham has given him many years to self reflect, and knowing that his days would soon come to an end, he used Connor to go back to who he was. A more of a caring mentor and a father figure.
I would say that eventhough he did achieve redemption by helping connor, he still doomed the Assassins to fight the Templars for years to come because he essentially persuaded connor to end the truce with Haytham. Haytham being Connors father was the ace in the hole for a truce but Achillies didnt have enough vision to see it. He still fell prey to the dogmatic thinking that led to the downfall of the colonial brotherhood sadly.
Hello MasterAssassin, great video as always! In my opinion, I think Achilles was a little misguided in Rogue and wanted to solely achieve what the creed ultimately desired and was too fixated in preventing the Templar's to get what they want instead of focusing on the bigger picture, which is something I think has impacted him with grief and regret in his older years as seen in AC3. By the way, I sent you an E-mail in your business address, care to check it out, please?
I remember playing ac3 thinking Achilles didn't want connor to become an assassin because of trauma but after playing rogue, now i understand that Achilles isn't bad its just he puts pride into the assassins too much to the point where he starts to make decisions that made him bad but at the same time he's good inside
In AC Rogue: Villain In AC 3: Anti-hero While Achilles does care for people as shown in the Homestead missions in AC 3 I do wish he didn't look at the Templars in black and white fashion as just being bad and needing to be eliminated. It would have been nice if he question his choices and views like Altair did when hunting his 9 targets.
achilles trying to remove the artifacts just so the templars dont get them but not only did he risk the assassins being corrupeted by the them but destroying counteless innocents over a rivalary thts supposed to be between two groups, shay had every right to act as he did, not only tht but when one begins to sacrifice others in the name of protection they end up becoming like those that they are protecting from
Achilles didn't disband the brotherhood, after crippling Achilles there is a cutscene between shay and haytham, where haytam initiates the eradication of the brotherhood. If you read the lore you'll know that the templars executed every assassin and only 2 escaped ( Achilles was spared by the Templar because of shay and was allowed to live only if he retired from the assassins) and the other is bellec, the trainer of Arno in unity. In that boss fight he explains to Arno how he escaped the purge of the colonial brotherhood
I know that the Rogue storyline likely wasn't conceived until after AC3 came out but it's a good explanation for why the Colonial Assassins were in disarray until Connor came along. But previous installments have shown that the Assassins are no better than the Templars and are not impervious to extremism.
Achilles was power hungry in AC Rogue. He already built a strong Brotherhood in the Colonies, along with powerful connections with native tribes in the River Valley, and Pirates in the North Atlantic. Not to mention the Assassins had their imprint all over New York. All he needed to do was keep the Manuscript and Precursor Box hidden, he didn't need to hunt its artifacts down. Achilles was dead-set on power and glory in Rogue. Just analyze what he says when he tells Shay: "I will not let you destroy everything we have built!" And this was immediately after Shay Called him out on his "mad grab for power." Once Shay obliterated his Colonial Brotherhood, Achilles just goes into exile in his Homestead, until Connor Kenway knocks on his front door and changes everything.
To build upon your Star Wars analogy, I also have noticed alot of similarities between AC Rouge/AC3s connecting stories and Star wars prequels/ original trilogy. To very briefly Summarise a few similarities,(1) Start of the game Assassins are doing well for themselves, they have a good base of operations in the Davenport homestead, have many resources and a vast Brotherhood. In the Prequels the same can be said for the Jedi of the temple in corousant. (2) In Rouge Shay betrays the assassins and is seriously injured in the process, he survives his injuries and with help from the Templars hunts down the assassins leaving one alive. In the prequles/OR Anakin betrays the Jedi, is left seriously injured in the process,he survives his injuries, becomes Darth Vader and with help from the Empire wipes out majority of Jedi, we are lead to believe only two remain Yoda and Kenobi. (3) In Ac3 it's is Haythoms son Connor who rebuilds the brotherhood through training of the only survivor of the assassins many years after the assassin purge. In Star wars it is Anakin/ Vaders son Luke who rebuilds the Jedi order through the training of the two survivors Yoda and Kenobi many years after the Jedi purge.
Connor had such a good point in this game but achilles would shut his plan down thinking it wad pointless as he couldn't understand how connor wanted to defend his people, also unpopular opinion, haytham is one of my fsvourite ac characters
There are no hero’s or villains in this story. The point of 3 and rouge was to show that the only difference between the assassins and templars was the method of obtaining peace as hinted by both Lucy and the doctor from ac1
We always shit on Jacob being the dumbest but sometimes I really think Achillies is the worst, I understand he lost his family but man was so full of ego after that even in 3 and sometimes I feel like he got all the templars and especially Haytham killed because of his personal vendetta
What I've always liked about Assassin's Creed, especially in the older games, is that it had philosophical questions that are dependent on the player to answer themselves. Whether or not you like assassins or templars, each order had their own share of questionable members. Haytham was hard to question if you really delved into his mindset. Shay a little questionable, but in his own right, he was correct. Achilles had his own problems, and his own ego, but when we got to AC 3, he does acknowledge the hubris of the assassin order. Not just his own, but the fact that the assassins begun to take a more indiscrete approach to everything in Rogue. Like the fortresses carrying their flags which destroys the purpose of the "We work in the darkness" part of their creed, which in the spirit of your Star Wars analogy, was similar to the Jedi in the prequels when they delved in politics and became some sort of private army than an independent order that was made to be peacemakers.
The way I always see it was this. By assassins creed 4 the Templar’s evolved. The Borgia family had manipulated the order to self serve themselves and that just couldn’t fly anymore. They knew that to stay ahead of the assassins they had to play the assassins at there own game and work in the shadows. Making sure that governments are manipulated to their favour and they have the resources and manpower to stop the wrong people getting their hands on the ISU artifacts. The Assassins on the other hand did not evolve their ways. How often between 3 and Unity did we see assassins blindly killing Templars before allowing their enemies to be taken over by zealous lunatics. During Achilles reign he allowed grief to cloud his judgment and had essentially a cult of murderous lunatics running around in denial that they where the problem. In 3 he caused a whole war against the British army which only resulted in a nation that contradicted the whole creed. It’s not until we see them in Unity do we actually see a reasonable group of assassins that understands blindly killing Templars for no reason other than they are one leads to more issues than it solves
When you replay ac3 after rouge there is multiple times where Achilles warns Conner on the outcome of his actions. He was blinded by the goal of not letting templars control the world but at the cost of how many people and cities were destroyed when they took the apples or precursor boxes. After it all when he became alone and crippled and old he could see the outcomes of what he had caused even at the end of rouge somewhat realizing he made shay.
Hope everything is well with you MasterAssassin. I don't mean to pry but you've sounded a bit stressed in some of your recent videos. Whatever it is, I hope things improve. 🙏 Your videos always lift my mood and I greatly appreciate it. 🦅
I honestly don't think Adewale would have handled things any better than Achilles. In fact, despite his being a sincerely good guy, his track record is kinda terrible. So if we remember the first discussion that Ade and Achilles have about the Haitian earthquake beginning of Rogue, we know that Adewale was previously aware of an earthquake occuring after someone entered a temple, even if he didn't make the connection. Separately we also know he left Mackandal in charge of the Haitian Brotherhood as it was Mackandal who sent the first Assassin into the temple (Mackandal was the genocidal Mentor who trained Agate from Liberation). After the Lisbon incident, Adewale continues to help Achilles search for more temples instead of noticing the pattern of earthquakes and is never seen or stated objecting to anything Achilles (or Mackandal) does. Based on that I don't think we can assume he would do anything differently. He had the same interest as Achilles in beating the Templars to the PoE as Edward and the Caribbean Assassins did with the Observatory. He also had the same interest in Revolution as Mackandal and although Mackandal doesn't appear in Freedom Cry, Adewale does espouse a more ambitious vision than Augustin and stated that he intended for the Maroons to have a proper military and revolution rather than just living in hiding, as they had been.
I like how Shay still wasn’t a target for Achilles to direct Connor to kill. It really shows how much he still cares for Shay on some level-and towards Connor on some level too.
To be fair, Shay was very far away by the time Connor was ready to hunt the Templars. Shay was searching for the precursor box in Europe during that time period, where he eventually killed Arno Dorian's father and kickstarted the events of AC Unity. Shay wasn't pulling any strings in the colonies.
What about Edward Kenway. . Can't imagine a worst offense as posing as an assasin using their outfit and using their motto "nothing is true, everything is permitted" as an excuse to be a plunder the caribean sea. The only good side was his side. Playing as him felt so right storywise.
Edward had to pay the price for his selfishness. He got his riches and glory, he got the Observatory, but in the end he had no one left to celebrate with as everyone he ever cared about either left him or died.
I do agree that the story of rogue was great and I would personally put it almost even with black flag. If everyone had calmed down and sat and talked for 20 minutes none of it would have happened lol
I believe there’s more nuance overall between the assassins and templars as a whole. We’ve been shown that there can be peace between the two groups if the right people are in charge on both sides. I feel the world would benefit from both groups templars to bring order to absolute anarchy and assassins to bring freedom to tyranny. Both these groups can be heroic in the right context. It just requires them to be able to look past their hatred for each other. I mean think about it Assassains creed 1 the final boss was an assassain ho once worked with templars! Unity and rouge were the biggest examples of how even the assassins can be shitty and not have everyone’s best interests in mind. I feel the nature of the Templar order having powerful people in powerful places happens to breed the kind of corruption that makes them look bad. But we saw the assassins almost always once in power get brought down through greed and corruption from within. The assassains aren’t much better when they control an area they don’t remain vigilant or get too lax and then allow mistakes that ultimately brings them out of power again. The saddest part is that this kind of writing would never be brought to fruition with how Ubisoft is handling the franchise.
I think Ezio at revelations is somewhat cold killer and villain too. Templars and assassins are not good or bad ,they are extremistic organisations for their reasons and benefit.
To be fair, Shay came in and started yelling right away. Achilles should have told him to step outside and come back when he's more level headed and likewise, Shay should have tried to come back and apologize for his outburst then calmly explain what happened. I did a rewrite of this game where Hope is the main antagonist. Her gang goes widely unnoticed by the brotherhood and attacks anyone who so much as sympathizes with the templars. This and a couple other circumstances cause Shay to defect to the templar order. Achilles would later on redeem himself by aiding Shay in taking out Hope's gang. Hope shoots him in the leg and Shay finally kills her.
I mean, Achilles attacked Shay first by bashing him against the window. If I were Shay I wouldn't apologize either, Achilles should be the one to apologize to me, like dude did you really attack me, like physically, just because I yelled at you?
Let's not forget that Haiti was also hit by an earthquake when an assassin went after one of these sites and Achilles knows that. It doesn't take a rocket secientist to realize there's a pattern here, as Shay points it out. Yet Achilles refuses to even consider that he's making a mistake, gets violent, and doubles down.
AC 3 and Rogue are ment to show there is a lot more gray between the Assassins and Templars along with pros and cons of each idea while also showing us if both groups if they do understand humanity needs both to be the best verisons of themselves. Achilles was misguided by lost of his wife and son in Rogue and in AC 3 he drowning in his guilt over how failed everyone who relied on him so he choose to move forward with Connor Kenway rebuilding things slowly together.
I am so happy, such a perfect arc, I am getting. I am starting to play AC3 with played Black Flag & Rouge before it. (even Rouge is more interesting because I played Unity before that)
It is very simple Achilles broke The tennis of the creed for ally with Bandits who harm innocent people Poison gas on new york Compromise the American assassin Brotherhood And yet everyone seems to forget that Achilles lost his wife and son he didn't have Time for grief for his loss Blinded by his sad emotion didn't see until it too late
After III's story I was kinda sad for Achilles because of how Connor treated him, but after playing Rogue I understood why Connor treated him this way, he was pure manipulator and overall bad person pretending to do good things
I was knew that!!! I was an really knew because Achilles was an one side for villan or something but after he learn about his Mistakes and the misunderstanding!!! He just thought or thinking about it before AC 3 realesed he also tell and Explain all the story of this Mentor of the Assassin Brotherhood as his accepted his until the death and gave him the last words for Connor!!!!😢😢😢😢!!!! Reast in piece Achilles
In Rogue, I see him as a man blinded by bitterness and ego who thought he was upholding the Creed. In AC3, I see a man redeemed for his past sins who died satisfied with what he did in the the very end of his life.
He was more obsessed and misguided than outright villainess. By the end of Rogue, he realized he was wrong and that’s why he was the broken man we found him as in 3.
one of the plot points that i think rogue really missed is why liam never took shays side. I mean they literally grew up together. you would think to try and get your friend back to the brotherhood.
Rouge is a great story about arrogance and following blindly, the fact that none of the other assassins only listend to Achilles and not shay even being blinded by shays affiliation with templars. They never stopped and thought about what they did wrong for him to turn on them but just passed the blame on shay
The real villain is Shay. Dude just traded one dogma for one that's far, far worse. Despite what the brotherhood has done, he had the option of fixing things whilst staying loyal to the Creed, like Arno has. Blind fool with an attitude.
Villain may be a bit strong. Achilles is an antagonist, definitely. However, to call him a villain would be to imply a degree of malice in his actions. His actions weren't malicious, merely ignorant and short-sighted. Now, looking at the story from the Templar perspective, he absolutely is a villain. But then again, so is every player character in the series from that viewpoint, minus Shay.
He wasn't villainous, he was just blinded by the creed, he was an extremist, he just wanted to not let the templars get their hands on the artifacts and have the assassins get them first, no matter the cost, even if it was for the greater good, he couldn't see the destruction he was causing, only Shay was able to see through it because he experienced it first hand.
Remember this. It doesn't matter the view, radicalism will always make you a villain to those you oppress with your view and vision.
:o
That’s not an excuse, if anything, it’s a motivation or reason for his villainy. Yet again, if thinking critically, it depends on what point of view you look at Achilles from.
he literally knew it happened in Haiti, still sent Shay, and then denied it to Shay's face. Fuck Achilles, only good thing we got out of him was Connor.
Between organized crime, large scale production of biochemical weapons in the middle of population centers, and hell having the Brotherhood insignia plastered on gang flags all over the place, I'm pretty sure every tenet of the assassins had been violated back to back.
"In your haste to save the world, boy, take care you don't destroy it."
~ Achilles to Connor
After having played Rogue and seen Achilles' mistakes as the Mentor of the Colonial Brotherhood in that game, those words in AC3 are now more meaningful.
Legit beautiful
Also after playing Rogue and going back to AC3 you can understand why Achilles was so hesitant to train Connor and keep telling him to leave
yap,this american games were unique in intertwining with each other directly more or less
If what I read was right, it was said that AC3, 4, R and U were written about the same time (note: written but not necessarily under development). Which is why this group of games were almost always supplementing each other one way or another, and one such example include William Miles mentioning to Desmond that there were attempts of collaboration between Templers and Assassins previously, implying what happened in Unity's Arno and Elise.
@@stormmeansnowork Honestly, I feel like AC 1-Revelations were great tie in because it gave Altair closure as well as Ezio, however 3-Unity didn't give closure for anyone. I feel like Ubisoft could make a game out of the middle and ending parts and close Arno, Connor and Shay's story. Or maybe even make another game after centered around Connor's daughter and Shay's son.
Connor was 13 in that memory???????
THAT KID KILLED LIKE 6 PEOPLE AND HE 13???
And a fully grown bear
templars stood no chance...
Yeah Miyamoto Musashi killed his first man when he was 13 as well and thats a real historical person
Yea connor is just built different, they basically just decided to give him superpowers, and in the dlc just said fuck it and stopped even trying to hide it
I can imagine Haytham being easily taken down by 18yr old Connor while He wasnt injured.
Let me explain ▶️
so Connor at 13yr old
is able to beat Adults soldiers + Jeggers (Jeggers are high trained best of best soldiers)
Haytham would be a joke for 18yr old Connor
What I find interesting is that Achilles fall to the same problem Altair fell to, pride and arrogance. The difference is when in their life it happened and how they dealt with it. For Achilles, it was a little to late to change and grow, as such, he became a hermit filled with gilt and remorse (maybe)
I feel with the situation with Shay defecting is both on Achilles and Shay. Achilles should have listened to Shay about Lisbon rather than dismiss him but also Shay should have explained what the artifact he saw looked like to make Achilles realize that it wasn't an Apple of Eden rather than immediately deciding to steal the book and run plus Achilles didn't know messing with the precursor artifacts are what caused the earthquakes.
The Colonial Assassins had to be the most incompetent cell shown in the games too.
Or is that Abstergo brainwashing? 🤔
@@digivagrant They are portrayed as very incompetent. Between having a flag with the assassin insignia raised in gang hideouts when they are supposed to be keeping their Brotherhood hidden and using poison gas on New York and allying with bandits even though they're not supposed to harm innocents.
@@JL32506 It's like how Hollywood props up their weal female protagonists by making male pro/antagonists dumb r incompetent 🤔
I dont think they can pull a KOTOR with just one small dlc
@@connorwiederich Even I slam my desk when I get casualties gassing Byzantinnes... 💀
@@JL32506 Agreed. One of my biggest complaints with Rogue is how evil the Assassins are: Poisoning New York, allying with bandits, attacking General Monro's men even after they surrender, leaving Monro in a burning building, etc.
He isn't really a villain. He is an antagonist. These are very different.
antagonist is the villain
@@timgonzalesjr5346 The two refer to different things. If they were the same, there would be no reason to have both words.
An antagonist is a character or plot device that acts as an obstacle for the protagonist. Nothing more, nothing less.
A villain is an evil or immoral character with malicious intent.
Not all antagonists are villains. Not all villains are antagonists. You can have a villain protagonist. You can have an antagonist that isn't necessary evil or has malicious intent. Stories are very often more nuanced than just "pure evil" vs "pure good". In fact, all good modern stories are more nuanced than this basic duality.
@@timgonzalesjr5346so L is the real villain in death note
@@xdrastig_4207 no, Light is the villain and protagonist while L is the antagonist
@@danielgomezpan3593 I was sarcastic
Achilles was the catalyst for Conner's story and one could say that Achilles used Conner but at the same time Conner wanted revenge for his mother's death and the destruction of his home/village. They killed 2 birds with one stone and changed history at the same time.
Achillies was human prone to mistakes his flaws was not listening to Shay and i am sure thats why he didnt want to take in Connor as a Assassin given he made a mistake once. I think he worries he would make another mistake and repeat what happened with Shay.
Yea I think that's why hes truly depressed in ac3 .I didnt realize Connor was 13 until now.haytham just manipulated shay by helping him after hea shipwrecked and goes to nyc.he was vulnerable.
@@kaycred3361 Not ship wrecked he had a assassins falling out and fell off a cliff. However yes i feel shay was manipulated into joining the templars. The templars acted more with the creed to make Shay feel he more belonged there.
You can't really say "he's just human and humans make mistakes" when his mistakes costed thousands of innocent people their lives and an entire city destroyed, all because he was too stupid and arrogant to believe Shay.
shay wasn't a mistake everyone else but shay were the mistakes
@@vengeance1450logic failure lol. Achilles "not believing" in Shay is not what caused the earthquake. Nothing Shay said prior to Lisbon could have prevented that. Achilles was reacting emotionally to Shay unnecessary rant. To win an argument, you should not lead with your emotions and anger. People stop listening when that happens. Shay is a flawed character even worse than Achilles. Achilles, when calm, acknowledge Shay was right about the artifact. That shows growth and maturity
Great video! About the analogy with Star Wars, I always saw Achilles as master Yoda. He was Grand Master of the Jedi order, he was unable to see the fall of the order, he gave up and also he didn't want to train Luke in TESB, just like Achilles. In my opinion he is much closer to Yoda than Obi-Wan. But either way you can relate him to whoever you like. Keep up the good work! (Sorry for spoilers)
Yeah I totally get it I originally wanted to say Yoda as well since he was like the “mentor” and went off into hiding. Ultimately I went with Obi Wan because obi wan taught Luke about what the force and Jedi were like how Achilles taught Connor who the assassins were. But I definitely understand your point and think it makes perfect sense. Thank you for watching and the kind words. I hope you have a good rest of your day!
I hope you have one too, fellow Assassin-Jedi!
Interesting you notice that Ahiles it's a Obi-Wan. I have feelings that Haythem is a Vader. So maybe Star Wars inspired writer?
I believe that Shay is Anakin, from prequels (He betrayed his allegiance and became a big member to the enemy order) and Haytham is Vader from original (A fight against father and son from two different orders), but only he wasn't redeemed at the end. I believe he's a Star Wars inspired character and that's why AC3 appeals more to me.
@@sofo66Shay's defection to the Templars is highly reminiscent of Anakin's, while his role in the Order is akin to Starkiller's role as Darth Vader's right hand.
In Rogue, I would say yes (but not to a great level), in AC3 I don't really think there is a 'villain' and this is honestly what I like about AC3's story, in that despite the Templars are the 'bad guys', Haytham's ideologies makes you really think about it and there's times I just had to agree with him
"Great Men are almost always Bad Men."
Charles Lee was the villain in AC3, there's nothing good about him.
Honestly ezio made me regain my trust in the assassin order after playing rogue
charles lee was the villain in AC3, he has literally no redeeming qualities and is pretty much a textbook black-and-white bad guy
There is a villain and Haytham is wrong. Why people didn't listen to what he literally says? Yes, he is well written and charismatic.
He is also a genocidal prick willing to destroy entire cultures in order to control the world. All his final discourse is quite ironic because he accuses the assassins of things that are also what templars do, including the fact that there will always be assassins because people will always rise against obsessive control and tyranny, and how templars do indoctrinate people and are also dominated by old man who want power.
I think he substituted grief for arrogance after his wife and kid died. Grief may have made him look weak as a leader, but the hole in his heart was still there even if he thought he had to be the leader. Simply a wrong mindset. That hole manifested as anger first, but when he was questioned/challanged on his leadership that anger turned to ignorance and arrogance.
I always felt the whole story and the people involved (Achilles and Hathem, Conner and Shay) were all showing that neither side is bad, that both sides are good. One side fights for freedom, the other for peace. Both are noble goals. What makes one bad over the other is how far they will go, and how much of the other's goal they are willing to give up for their own. The assassin's become bad when they use terrorism (like in rogue with the gas) and the Templars when they use tyranny. Ultimately both exist so that the other doesn't take things too far unchallenged.
Also the Obi Wan analogy was the perfect analogy. I knew it as soon as he said his name
Not just Achilles but the whole Colonial Brotherhood under him were consumed by this weird arrogance that no other brotherhood had. They believed they were better than everyone, and could do as they pleased. They even looked down on Shay like some peasant for some weird reason, despite obviously being incredibly talented. They used him like dumb muscle. Even that native american within their ranks treated Shay like garbage - you'd think he would understand what it's like to be treated that way most of all... Though, this was probably more a flaw in the writing to force you to feel alienated from them.
Yeah. Felt like the Brotherhood and Templars swapped places for a day.
@@Copperkaiju and it worked
Shay was just a whelp man, how do you expect them to treat him? He has to prove himself, that's what his task was, in that he fucked up and blamed,yelled and also stole from his brothers without even giving them some time and talk about what happened, Shay is just reckless.
@aswinraj_ar Holy shit you're coping hard. The game actively shows you Achilles wasn't gonna happen and planned on destroying more cities.
Tell me, why couldn't Achilles ask Shay why exactly he'd steal it? A good master would do that.
@@aswinraj_ar
If you got 30,000 people killed all because you were asked to retrieve an artifact, I think you’d be rightfully pissed at the people who asked for you to get it.
I personally would find a Video interesting about the Optional Main Assasination in the Games(like Biddle in Ac 3)
Great analysis, Achilles is only ever an antagonist or anti-villain at most, than a true villain. And after all that he really ascends into a truly wise mentor (loved the Obi-wan analogy). I feel there is this crucial scene in Rogue that most everyone forgets... when Adewale comes to visit Achilles and Shay listens in on that conversation, they mention the Haiti earthquake as a separate random event from their agent going into the temple to retrieve the artefact. Meaning they didn't know that's what caused the earthquake.
Then, after Lisbon, when Shay went in all screaming and guns blazing and accused Achilles of causing all that death deliberately, Achilles simply refused to believe it because the idea he and the Assassins had been killing thousands was probably too much to handle at that point in his life given his own personal losses. Not to mention Achilles had just gathered supplies for Adewale to take to Haiti on a relief mission and suddenly he is the reason everyone died in Lisbon. So I think he just spiraled into denial until the very end of Rogue, when he finally admitted to Liam that Shay was right and refused to handle the artefact in the Arctic temple.
Achilles also saved Shay's life when Liam went to shoot him. So all in all, by the time of AC3 Achilles was just a heap of guilt and self-loathing, he even told Connor he despised himself for never mustering the courage to kill himself. I think Shay was so traumatised by Lisbon that he didn't communicate well what he learned, and Achilles was not prepared to accept the tragedy he caused, so like you said that entire plot hinges on one massive misunderstanding.
I mean the other point towards achiles is that there were no pieces of eden shown prior to rogue that caused such levels of destruction before. so a piece of eden being able to literally quake the earth to that degree was just completely unheard of, even hope who explicitly has been stated to study these things didn't believe it.
Translation: They let their emotions override their sense of reason and went spiraling into idiotic conflict. Then, authoritarians took in one of them and spoonfed them authoritarian ideology after he became lost.
@@DarkEdgePrince true, it's Templar ideology and lies and Shay totally fell for it... when Shay was with the Assassins he knew they never "terrorised people" like Col. Munro claimed. Only the Templars called the Assassins gangs of criminals. Basically every "gang HQ" Shay destroyed was in fact an Assassin bureau. That's what we see in AC Revelations or in Black flag when Ezio or Edward must defend the Assassin dens, only here we see it from the Templars' PoV.
Even at the beginning when assassins break into the Finnegans' house we never learn what they were really there for, all we know is that the Finnegans have strong ties to the Templars. Shay sided with the Templars out of gratitude and he never stopped to question the lies he was told even when those lies contradicted everything he knew of the Assassins.
Thank you!!! Everyone seems to forget that when Achilles saw what the artifacts actually were he told Liam to stand down and prevented him to shoot Shay. Achilles was a flawed mentor but he was not evil. He believed he was preventing the Templars to obtain powerful ISU artifacts, not causing earthquakes. And we all know what the Templars do with the Pieces of Eden. Shay literally screamed to him he was a murderer, but he couldn't know what the Temples were before he saw with his own eyes. Achilles redeemed himself by training Connor who was essential for Desmond to save the world from the second Solar Storm.
7:59 i don't think Achilles failed with shay at least not in terms of making him an assassin and teaching him the creed because shay was the ONLY person during the events of rogue who actually didn't break the tenants of the creed
Except the third, obviously
@@Kaijugan True , he did kill Dorian
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
Exactly Shay, I think was in the wrong because he painted Achilles as the problem with the assassins when clearly, the other assassins were not like that the Templars produce people like the Borgias and Haitham, which is the exception, but they produce people like the Borgias, like evil dictators the assassins do not that’s the exception not the wall on their side
In rogue his actions were villainous
If anything I don’t think hes fully villainous like the Borgias type of evil
He was mostly blinded by his own delusion that he knew best and had he had listen to Shay then he wouldn’t have sided with the templars to save the assassins from his stupidity and ignorance
But he did redeem himself somewhat in training Connor and took him as practically another son figure with how close they were for such a short time
Truth be told idk if i would say villainous more like unenlightened at the time he likely felt the pieces of Eden were like the apple. Thus they had to be kept from the templars. Ask me someone should of accompanied Shay that Achillies trusted more. Or Achillies should of went with him himself then maybe they would of seen the threat they held.
@@1980Shadowwolf nah they just switched the assassins and templars😂
I would say he is a villian in Rogue but in AC3's timeline he redeemed himself. Kinda like Rodrigo Borgia in AC2 and Brotherhood, he was a villian in 2 but really wasn't in Brotherhood. I see everyone saying "humans make mistakes" which is true but when your mistakes lead to thousands of deaths that's too far and unforgiveable in my opinion.
Wow, this video really got me thinking! The idea that Achilles could be the real villain in Assassin's Creed is mind-blowing. I've always seen him as a legendary hero, but this analysis makes some compelling points. The game's ability to challenge our perceptions of historical figures is truly remarkable. The way the narrative unfolds and the moral ambiguity surrounding Achilles' actions really adds depth to the story. Kudos to the creator for shedding light on this intriguing perspective. It's discussions like these that make the Assassin's Creed franchise so thought-provoking and engaging. Can't wait to see more content like this!
AC3's story and characters were absolutely legendary for the entire franchise! So glad it was my first Assassin's Creed
It was mid at most. Ac2 better in every way.
@@SpidahhhMan AC3 was much better.
Loved the SW comparison you made. Have you ever considered doing a full nlown video comparing the Colonial Brotherhood's downfall to that of the prequel era Jedi? Lots of comparisons of both Orders becoming more arrogant and screwing over a young pupil with so much potential to where they get manipulated into switching sides and kill those they once saw as family. Hell you could say Achilles is the AC version of Yoda being a stubborn yet traumatized old man who refuses to train him at first but gives in and eventually dies peacefully seeing Connor become a fully fledged Assassin akin to Yoda and Luke.
After playing rogue I started reading the Assassin creed book forsaken which is basically the life of Haythem seen through a diary perspective just after the end credit scene of black flag till him finding out about Connor. Which adds a lot more character development to haythem and his struggles too.
The Beauty of the Kenway Saga is it's subtlety, and only those most perceptive and attentive piece it all together. Its why i love the kenway saga, it all comes together when you play 3-unity. It all overlaps.
ACIII is probably my favorite Assassin's Creed game. I always liked learning about that time period as a kid, but I think the thing that the game captures better than any other media about this time period is just how murky everything is in terms of morals. Yes, it's a good thing that the people in the colonies were able to free themselves from the oppression of the King, but those same people would go on to enslave an entire race of people and commit genocide against another. I think making the protagonist of the game a native was the right choice, because it unfortunately reflects the truth that so many native people fought alongside the colonists in pursuit of the promise of peace, only for their tribes to be betrayed and slaughtered by the very people they helped to gain independence. As for Achilles himself, the fact that he's a land-owning black man tells us a lot about his life that the game never does because of historical context. All the game needs to tell us is that he's a land-owning black man in colonial times and we can look in the history books to see how he has most likely been treated ever since he came to the colonies. I honestly think, when it comes to the characters of ACIII (and Rogue when they appear in that game) it's a disservice to refer to them as "Heroes" and "Villains" because it's story, like the history of the US, is a lot more complicated and nuanced than that.
Oh my God, who the hell cares?
Yeah. AC3, Liberation, and Rogue may be In my top 5 favorite settings due to this reality in the games. AC3 in particular due to the many conflicts taking place at once.
Good write up, I agree with you completely
This is about as good a synopsis of a game I have ever read. It is insightful and very thoughtful especially in reference to that period in our nation's history. Brilliantly stated!
Preach
These 2 games are the most emotionally of the series, I mean when you see Achilles mentor for Shay and then Connor it’s just crazy, first you have to destroy everything that have been built by Achilles only because of his stubbornness, then you rebuilt everything with Connor who do everything right, yeah Achilles got his redemption by training Connor but I thing above all when he was training Connor he was thinking about vengeance from Haytham first then about the creed.
But man these two games are the best for me, they made me litteraly cry every time (Ezios 3 games excluded)
I think shay actually saved the assassin's from becoming like the templars all he had to do was make the assassins start over and he was the one that said to spare achilleas.
I want to believe that Achilles hoped to used the artifact in a attempt to bring his family back, not understanding the consequences.
Maaaan you are the best Assassin's Creed content creator in UA-cam !!! I love ur videos and i can understand how much you love ac with your creative videos🔥🔥
I really feel like (even though it never was mentioned) that Achilles was trying to find the pre cursors in order to bring his wife and child back. I think Achilles was a really broken guy (I mean before Haytham blew his kneecap apart) I feel a sense of sorrow for him. Yet also playing as Shay you truly realize just how wrong he was but by the time of 3 he is a broken (literally broken he can barely walk) old man that sees this young boy in need of his help and he takes him under his wing. Connor and His father/son relationship is one of the greatest relationships in Assassins creed. I still think Haytham’s character arc is the saddest it’s right as AC 4 ends you see this happy little boy with his father excited to see a show at an opera. Practically right after this is Edward’s death and then he’s taken by The Order and forced into the life of a Templar and in a way he had to really push how far he was into the order because of his lineage they would have killed him instantly if he spoke out. Yet at the end of the day all these stories tie in together in various ways it’s pretty amazing.
I'm playing through Rogue and feel the same. Its cool seeing areas from AC 3 before they became war torn; Connor is pretty much undoing what Shay did when he destroys many of The Templar bases. But the story baffles me a bit especially with how many different factions are at play, especially the gang strongholds. If I hadn't played AC3 first, I would think Achailles is a straight up evil villian despite the throw away line about his family. The assassin's straight up hold innocent natives hostage in this game and pretty much do vile stuff we've seen the Templar do in older games. Even though assassin's like Ezio hang out with hired mercenaries, thieves, and the like, he never had them straight up target innocent people like in Rogue.
Personally I don't think there's a villian at all. I feel like the games were trying to paint the Templar vs assassin's conflict as grey, but feel like Rogue could have done better at it. We see Shay having doubts about what's right and wrong, but so far in the game I haven't seen the gray area from the Templar, though maybe AC3 is doing it kind of with Haythems pov.
Achilles wasn’t a bad guy. He just made a lot of mistakes he was blinded by grief and his loyalty to the Assassins.
i see rogue as, Achilles didn't want to believe Shay, because Achilles sees the assassin's as the protectors of the people, and after hearing that instead they destroyed a city Achilles may of thought Shay was lying at first and was corrupted there and then
I hope you never get a burnout on AC and YT. This channel is great.
Great video man, I'm not sure if there is a villain in rogue and maybe not in 3 either, I think ur analogy to the Trifecta of Obi,Ani,Luke and Achilles,Shay,Connor is actually pretty good, it sat with me till the end of the vid. It's almost like shay was the untapped potential that Achilles made an honest human mistake with and Connor was his retribution. Nice video tho I enjoy stuff like this, I know it's all theory but it's good stuff
Love your videos keep it up bro 🤜
Some factions were worse than others. The Templars that Ezio faced in his lifetime were truly the scum of the earth. The one's in syndicate were just really a product of the times, but they weren't moral. Unity, also evil.
I couldn’t believe it when I realized he was named “Achilles” and he had a limp, which reminded me of the “Achilles’ Heel” thing. His weakness was being blinded by his extremism and pride, which resulted to his injury on his leg, a reminder of how he lost his creed due to his weaknesses.
I like Achilles and Ratohnhaké:ton’s dynamic and felt so empty when Achilles passed away. Somehow the Davenport area felt something was missing despite the side quests and a bunch of people living there.
I recently had an amazing idea for the next AC game but it’s a region I doubt will get any attention. Immediately following WW I and the Armenian genocide many of the Ottoman leaders responsible for the mass killings evaded persecution for their crimes. In order give them the punishment that the world failed to some Armenians created operation Nemesis (named after the Greek god of revenge) where they sent out assassins to kill certain Ottoman leaders. One assassin in particular Soghomon Tehlirian assassinated both Harutian Mgrditichian (an important member of the Ottoman secret police similar to the Nazi gustapo) and Talaat Pasha (minister of the interior for the Ottoman Empire and primary leader behind the genocide). He assassinated Harutian Mgrditichian in Instanbul and Talaat had fled to Berlin where he was tracked down and killed in the street. I think using Soghomon as a sort of outline for the protagonist and having the game take place across a few major cites rather than a large open world similar to AC 2 would be the setup for a very interesting game.
To the Assassin's and Templar's it's more of a war of belief than a war between good and evil
Yeah neither side is good or evil really they are more neutral with both sides being guilty of some pretty messed up stuff
I've never been a huge fan of Achilles. He's not a badly written character, just a guy blinded by his position as mentor. He's at his lowest in Rogue of course, but he still wasn't great in AC3.
The Templars tried multiple times to avoid war by using subtle means (Johnson buying native land, Pitcairn wanting to parley, etc), but Achilles made Connor believe they were irredeemibly evil, causing Connor to choose violence and escalate things. While the Templars are no saints, Haytham did try to connect with his son, and while I don't believe peace between the Brotherhood and Order would have been possible long-term, I do think Connor and Haytham could have made compromises for each other. But Achilles denies Connor that chance, and sets him on the path to kill his own father.
After the Templars are gone, Connor has little left. His leg is badly messed up from the chase with Charles Lee, he had to kill his best friend, his people are forced to leave their territory, Juno tells him she just used him for her own needs... I think Achilles is partially responsible for Connor's misery. Had he not fueled Connor's hatred towards the Templars, and allowed Connor to negotiate with Haytham, things may not have ended so bleak. Connor essentially becomes another Achilles, a crippled man, living alone, haunted by doubt and sorrow. I can absolutely understand why Achilles did what he did, but what he did broke Connor.
I feel like the assassins through the 18th century lost what it meant to be an assassin. Not just Achillies. Achillies had his own personal traumas, but as seen in Unity, the Assassins globally weren't in the right headspace during that time. They were similar to what happened in Masyaf in AC1. They lost sight of safeguarding free will and protecting people and focused too much on being anti-templar and keeping first civ artifacts out of their hands. Their global network was also small while the world kept growing bigger. After the colonial assassins fell and other factions of that time also being shook up, everyone left around had to re-evaluate what it meant to be assassins and readjust themselves to the new world. Just like how Altair had to shift the Brotherhood's focus and methods in the codex. Meanwhile the Templars have remained consistent on their goal of attaining complete order and only view the assassin's as a nuisance. Their goal isn't to destroy the assassins, it was to take over. Which is why despite the repeated failed plans they would still be around. Because they focused on that larger goal, their ability to communicate to other branches was easier. They didn't have a fight for power unless someone became selfish. Everyone had their job and did it.
He was a radical just like Gamilat: the end justifies the means. But he admits that Shay was right. Just like Gamilat accepted his death as agreed with Bayek. And his role in reestablishing the assassins was vital.
It weird in AC 3 he looks like a hero a true master but in Rogue he just doesnt seem the same maybe in AC 3 he reflected on his actions and changed, a new man in AC 3 thats probably why he retired from the assassins too
The way I see it, there probably was a good reason for Achilles to become a master assassin and a mentor in the first place. He definitely didn't achieve that by killing his competition or doing something evil. I think that because Rogue is set in probably when the colonial assassins were the strongest and had many connections around the world, he just got too hasty and stopped caring about the basic rules of the brotherhood.
The brutal isolation given to him by Shay/Haytham has given him many years to self reflect, and knowing that his days would soon come to an end, he used Connor to go back to who he was. A more of a caring mentor and a father figure.
I would say that eventhough he did achieve redemption by helping connor, he still doomed the Assassins to fight the Templars for years to come because he essentially persuaded connor to end the truce with Haytham. Haytham being Connors father was the ace in the hole for a truce but Achillies didnt have enough vision to see it. He still fell prey to the dogmatic thinking that led to the downfall of the colonial brotherhood sadly.
Hello MasterAssassin, great video as always!
In my opinion, I think Achilles was a little misguided in Rogue and wanted to solely achieve what the creed ultimately desired and was too fixated in preventing the Templar's to get what they want instead of focusing on the bigger picture, which is something I think has impacted him with grief and regret in his older years as seen in AC3.
By the way, I sent you an E-mail in your business address, care to check it out, please?
Such a great video please more about ac3 or Connor and Achilles
I remember playing ac3 thinking Achilles didn't want connor to become an assassin because of trauma but after playing rogue, now i understand that Achilles isn't bad its just he puts pride into the assassins too much to the point where he starts to make decisions that made him bad but at the same time he's good inside
In AC Rogue: Villain
In AC 3: Anti-hero
While Achilles does care for people as shown in the Homestead missions in AC 3 I do wish he didn't look at the Templars in black and white fashion as just being bad and needing to be eliminated. It would have been nice if he question his choices and views like Altair did when hunting his 9 targets.
achilles trying to remove the artifacts just so the templars dont get them but not only did he risk the assassins being corrupeted by the them but destroying counteless innocents over a rivalary thts supposed to be between two groups, shay had every right to act as he did, not only tht but when one begins to sacrifice others in the name of protection they end up becoming like those that they are protecting from
7:34 the grave written "Connor Davenport" is not actually Rotomhakaeton but Achilles real son Connor's grave
Ya, I feel like Connor if he had a grave would want one with his true identity written.
Nice video. Interesting topic
Achilles didn't disband the brotherhood, after crippling Achilles there is a cutscene between shay and haytham, where haytam initiates the eradication of the brotherhood. If you read the lore you'll know that the templars executed every assassin and only 2 escaped ( Achilles was spared by the Templar because of shay and was allowed to live only if he retired from the assassins) and the other is bellec, the trainer of Arno in unity. In that boss fight he explains to Arno how he escaped the purge of the colonial brotherhood
always loved that his hat had the hood beak thing
I know that the Rogue storyline likely wasn't conceived until after AC3 came out but it's a good explanation for why the Colonial Assassins were in disarray until Connor came along. But previous installments have shown that the Assassins are no better than the Templars and are not impervious to extremism.
Alos i love how Achilis Projects Ratonhnhaké:ton with litterally Connor as his son, with his sons name.
One thing I LOVE about AC is when the story line matches perfectly. Or you know in the olden games at-least.
Love your video amd keep up the great work
I love your videos keep it up G
Thank you master assassin
Achilles was power hungry in AC Rogue. He already built a strong Brotherhood in the Colonies, along with powerful connections with native tribes in the River Valley, and Pirates in the North Atlantic. Not to mention the Assassins had their imprint all over New York. All he needed to do was keep the Manuscript and Precursor Box hidden, he didn't need to hunt its artifacts down.
Achilles was dead-set on power and glory in Rogue. Just analyze what he says when he tells Shay: "I will not let you destroy everything we have built!" And this was immediately after Shay Called him out on his "mad grab for power." Once Shay obliterated his Colonial Brotherhood, Achilles just goes into exile in his Homestead, until Connor Kenway knocks on his front door and changes everything.
To build upon your Star Wars analogy, I also have noticed alot of similarities between AC Rouge/AC3s connecting stories and Star wars prequels/ original trilogy. To very briefly Summarise a few similarities,(1) Start of the game Assassins are doing well for themselves, they have a good base of operations in the Davenport homestead, have many resources and a vast Brotherhood. In the Prequels the same can be said for the Jedi of the temple in corousant. (2) In Rouge Shay betrays the assassins and is seriously injured in the process, he survives his injuries and with help from the Templars hunts down the assassins leaving one alive. In the prequles/OR Anakin betrays the Jedi, is left seriously injured in the process,he survives his injuries, becomes Darth Vader and with help from the Empire wipes out majority of Jedi, we are lead to believe only two remain Yoda and Kenobi. (3) In Ac3 it's is Haythoms son Connor who rebuilds the brotherhood through training of the only survivor of the assassins many years after the assassin purge. In Star wars it is Anakin/ Vaders son Luke who rebuilds the Jedi order through the training of the two survivors Yoda and Kenobi many years after the Jedi purge.
Connor had such a good point in this game but achilles would shut his plan down thinking it wad pointless as he couldn't understand how connor wanted to defend his people, also unpopular opinion, haytham is one of my fsvourite ac characters
There are no hero’s or villains in this story. The point of 3 and rouge was to show that the only difference between the assassins and templars was the method of obtaining peace as hinted by both Lucy and the doctor from ac1
We always shit on Jacob being the dumbest but sometimes I really think Achillies is the worst, I understand he lost his family but man was so full of ego after that even in 3 and sometimes I feel like he got all the templars and especially Haytham killed because of his personal vendetta
What I've always liked about Assassin's Creed, especially in the older games, is that it had philosophical questions that are dependent on the player to answer themselves. Whether or not you like assassins or templars, each order had their own share of questionable members. Haytham was hard to question if you really delved into his mindset. Shay a little questionable, but in his own right, he was correct. Achilles had his own problems, and his own ego, but when we got to AC 3, he does acknowledge the hubris of the assassin order. Not just his own, but the fact that the assassins begun to take a more indiscrete approach to everything in Rogue. Like the fortresses carrying their flags which destroys the purpose of the "We work in the darkness" part of their creed, which in the spirit of your Star Wars analogy, was similar to the Jedi in the prequels when they delved in politics and became some sort of private army than an independent order that was made to be peacemakers.
The way I always see it was this.
By assassins creed 4 the Templar’s evolved. The Borgia family had manipulated the order to self serve themselves and that just couldn’t fly anymore. They knew that to stay ahead of the assassins they had to play the assassins at there own game and work in the shadows. Making sure that governments are manipulated to their favour and they have the resources and manpower to stop the wrong people getting their hands on the ISU artifacts.
The Assassins on the other hand did not evolve their ways. How often between 3 and Unity did we see assassins blindly killing Templars before allowing their enemies to be taken over by zealous lunatics.
During Achilles reign he allowed grief to cloud his judgment and had essentially a cult of murderous lunatics running around in denial that they where the problem.
In 3 he caused a whole war against the British army which only resulted in a nation that contradicted the whole creed.
It’s not until we see them in Unity do we actually see a reasonable group of assassins that understands blindly killing Templars for no reason other than they are one leads to more issues than it solves
Never played Rogue. This clears up my confusion over deciding Connor as his name when he was saying he could pass as a Spaniard or Italian
When you replay ac3 after rouge there is multiple times where Achilles warns Conner on the outcome of his actions. He was blinded by the goal of not letting templars control the world but at the cost of how many people and cities were destroyed when they took the apples or precursor boxes. After it all when he became alone and crippled and old he could see the outcomes of what he had caused even at the end of rouge somewhat realizing he made shay.
Hope everything is well with you MasterAssassin. I don't mean to pry but you've sounded a bit stressed in some of your recent videos. Whatever it is, I hope things improve. 🙏 Your videos always lift my mood and I greatly appreciate it. 🦅
I honestly don't think Adewale would have handled things any better than Achilles. In fact, despite his being a sincerely good guy, his track record is kinda terrible.
So if we remember the first discussion that Ade and Achilles have about the Haitian earthquake beginning of Rogue, we know that Adewale was previously aware of an earthquake occuring after someone entered a temple, even if he didn't make the connection. Separately we also know he left Mackandal in charge of the Haitian Brotherhood as it was Mackandal who sent the first Assassin into the temple (Mackandal was the genocidal Mentor who trained Agate from Liberation).
After the Lisbon incident, Adewale continues to help Achilles search for more temples instead of noticing the pattern of earthquakes and is never seen or stated objecting to anything Achilles (or Mackandal) does. Based on that I don't think we can assume he would do anything differently. He had the same interest as Achilles in beating the Templars to the PoE as Edward and the Caribbean Assassins did with the Observatory. He also had the same interest in Revolution as Mackandal and although Mackandal doesn't appear in Freedom Cry, Adewale does espouse a more ambitious vision than Augustin and stated that he intended for the Maroons to have a proper military and revolution rather than just living in hiding, as they had been.
Achilles is like the Mace Windu of the AC universe
I like how Shay still wasn’t a target for Achilles to direct Connor to kill. It really shows how much he still cares for Shay on some level-and towards Connor on some level too.
To be fair, Shay was very far away by the time Connor was ready to hunt the Templars. Shay was searching for the precursor box in Europe during that time period, where he eventually killed Arno Dorian's father and kickstarted the events of AC Unity. Shay wasn't pulling any strings in the colonies.
Shay saved his life, Achilles owed him that atleast.
He was definitely misguided/blinded by his hubris.
Definitely evolved from that by the time of AC3
What about Edward Kenway. . Can't imagine a worst offense as posing as an assasin using their outfit and using their motto "nothing is true, everything is permitted" as an excuse to be a plunder the caribean sea. The only good side was his side. Playing as him felt so right storywise.
Edward had to pay the price for his selfishness. He got his riches and glory, he got the Observatory, but in the end he had no one left to celebrate with as everyone he ever cared about either left him or died.
Yo the star wars reference blew my mind.
I do agree that the story of rogue was great and I would personally put it almost even with black flag. If everyone had calmed down and sat and talked for 20 minutes none of it would have happened lol
We need the return of lile every gsme is related to each other again and you meet the protaganists
I believe there’s more nuance overall between the assassins and templars as a whole. We’ve been shown that there can be peace between the two groups if the right people are in charge on both sides. I feel the world would benefit from both groups templars to bring order to absolute anarchy and assassins to bring freedom to tyranny. Both these groups can be heroic in the right context. It just requires them to be able to look past their hatred for each other. I mean think about it Assassains creed 1 the final boss was an assassain ho once worked with templars! Unity and rouge were the biggest examples of how even the assassins can be shitty and not have everyone’s best interests in mind. I feel the nature of the Templar order having powerful people in powerful places happens to breed the kind of corruption that makes them look bad. But we saw the assassins almost always once in power get brought down through greed and corruption from within. The assassains aren’t much better when they control an area they don’t remain vigilant or get too lax and then allow mistakes that ultimately brings them out of power again. The saddest part is that this kind of writing would never be brought to fruition with how Ubisoft is handling the franchise.
I think Ezio at revelations is somewhat cold killer and villain too.
Templars and assassins are not good or bad ,they are extremistic organisations for their reasons and benefit.
To be fair, Shay came in and started yelling right away. Achilles should have told him to step outside and come back when he's more level headed and likewise, Shay should have tried to come back and apologize for his outburst then calmly explain what happened. I did a rewrite of this game where Hope is the main antagonist. Her gang goes widely unnoticed by the brotherhood and attacks anyone who so much as sympathizes with the templars. This and a couple other circumstances cause Shay to defect to the templar order. Achilles would later on redeem himself by aiding Shay in taking out Hope's gang. Hope shoots him in the leg and Shay finally kills her.
I mean, Achilles attacked Shay first by bashing him against the window. If I were Shay I wouldn't apologize either, Achilles should be the one to apologize to me, like dude did you really attack me, like physically, just because I yelled at you?
Also Shay is still hurt because he, you know... Murdered millions of people?
Let's not forget that Haiti was also hit by an earthquake when an assassin went after one of these sites and Achilles knows that. It doesn't take a rocket secientist to realize there's a pattern here, as Shay points it out. Yet Achilles refuses to even consider that he's making a mistake, gets violent, and doubles down.
AC 3 and Rogue are ment to show there is a lot more gray between the Assassins and Templars along with pros and cons of each idea while also showing us if both groups if they do understand humanity needs both to be the best verisons of themselves. Achilles was misguided by lost of his wife and son in Rogue and in AC 3 he drowning in his guilt over how failed everyone who relied on him so he choose to move forward with Connor Kenway rebuilding things slowly together.
I am so happy, such a perfect arc, I am getting.
I am starting to play AC3 with played
Black Flag & Rouge before it.
(even Rouge is more interesting because I played Unity before that)
If people understood the period of rogue to ac3 they would know achilles is the villian,haytham said it best ,"freedom is a invitation to chaos "
The only news about assassin's Creed currently is the NFTs. Ooof
you should do which assassin is the most educated, also which one is the best survivalist and which assassin is the most disciplined
It is very simple Achilles broke The tennis of the creed for ally with Bandits who harm innocent people Poison gas on new york Compromise the American assassin Brotherhood
And yet everyone seems to forget that Achilles lost his wife and son he didn't have Time for grief for his loss Blinded by his sad emotion didn't see until it too late
After III's story I was kinda sad for Achilles because of how Connor treated him, but after playing Rogue I understood why Connor treated him this way, he was pure manipulator and overall bad person pretending to do good things
I was knew that!!! I was an really knew because Achilles was an one side for villan or something but after he learn about his Mistakes and the misunderstanding!!! He just thought or thinking about it before AC 3 realesed he also tell and Explain all the story of this Mentor of the Assassin Brotherhood as his accepted his until the death and gave him the last words for Connor!!!!😢😢😢😢!!!! Reast in piece Achilles
In Rogue, I see him as a man blinded by bitterness and ego who thought he was upholding the Creed. In AC3, I see a man redeemed for his past sins who died satisfied with what he did in the the very end of his life.
i love your videos
i slightly disagree with Connor not becoming an assassin. He was led to Achilles by Juno,maybe could have traveled elsewhere to get his training.
No one is all villain. He's got a purpose on why he did what he did.
He was more obsessed and misguided than outright villainess. By the end of Rogue, he realized he was wrong and that’s why he was the broken man we found him as in 3.
one of the plot points that i think rogue really missed is why liam never took shays side. I mean they literally grew up together. you would think to try and get your friend back to the brotherhood.
Villain for me is shay and I really wanted connor to find him and end him back when the rogue was released.
Rouge is a great story about arrogance and following blindly, the fact that none of the other assassins only listend to Achilles and not shay even being blinded by shays affiliation with templars. They never stopped and thought about what they did wrong for him to turn on them but just passed the blame on shay
The real villain is Shay. Dude just traded one dogma for one that's far, far worse. Despite what the brotherhood has done, he had the option of fixing things whilst staying loyal to the Creed, like Arno has. Blind fool with an attitude.
Earned a subscriber.
Villain may be a bit strong. Achilles is an antagonist, definitely. However, to call him a villain would be to imply a degree of malice in his actions. His actions weren't malicious, merely ignorant and short-sighted.
Now, looking at the story from the Templar perspective, he absolutely is a villain. But then again, so is every player character in the series from that viewpoint, minus Shay.
We need a game that ends it with shay or something