How Assassins and Templars were ruined by a reticon | Assassin’s Creed

Hi all. In almost every story there are “heroes” and “villains”. More evil and less evil. Protagonists and antagonists. And behind all these things, ideologies are worth. As you could guess, their ideologies stand behind the Assassins and Templars. We will discuss these ideologies ourselves how they are similar, why it is important to adhere to them and how one of them was ruined.

Take the swords and armor of the time, such, crusades or put on hidden blades, depending on what you like and we start.

II part | Assassins and Templars

Let’s start with the origins of these two fractions and we will not take into account the Retcon in Acorigins.

It is not known significantly how these two fractions appeared. I can assume that the ideologically assassins have existed since the first civilization, at least. The very first assassins were Adam and Eve, who sought free yourself From the clutches of the first civilization, which sought to control people. Nothing reminds? Right. Ideology of assassins and tampleers.

I remind you for those who do not know/do not remember: the Assassins strive for freedom, which is chewing Ezio in their monologue. For those who did not understand, he says that there

22 years ago I stood here. And watched my relatives die. They were betrayed by those whom I called “friends”. Revenge overshadowed my mind. She would have destroyed me if not for the wisdom of those who taught me how to manage their instincts. They did not give me answers, but helped me study. We do not need the owners, neither the Medici nor Savonarola. We ourselves are free to choose our own path. Many people want to take freedom from us, and many of you will obey them. But it is the ability to choose what is true for us, and makes us people. No book, not a single teacher will give you answers, will open the way. Choose your path, don’t follow me and not for anyone else.

Ezio Auditor de Firence

Templars strive for control, but not only because of this, they have a conflict with the assassins. While the Templars are always using and chasing the Particles of Eden, the assassins try to hide them, because the particles take the will from a person. The most important thing, as Assassins believe, is a thing. And it seems that both of these fractions, diametrically opposite, but as if not. Yes, their philosophy is different, but the goal is common. More precisely – the world. And this is the whole charm. Assassins see the world in the freedom of people’s minds, and the Templars see the world in control. That is, one extreme and another extreme, and all for the sake of a common goal.

If you think that https://noaccount-casinos.co.uk/ ideology is done just like that, is ready to challenge this, because the consequences of moving away from this are shown in Acrogue. Assassins in colonial America, instead of the goals set by the creators of the Order, began to think about their political position, and they wanted to kill the same neck, due to disagreement with them. And all this, caused their disappearance.

Also, there were various reasoning about the union between these two fractions, as an example, we take Accunity. Mirabeu and Monsieur de La Serr want to unite, but of course, there are those who will be against this, if more specifically, then this is Pierre Bellek from the Assassins and the Gemymen from the Templar.

In modern times, the Assassins lead, so to speak, the “race for knowledge” with the Templars. Oh, that is, with Abstergo.

If you summarize here, then the assassins and the Templars are not “less evil and more evil”, but rather, to achieve a close to the ideal of society, you need to take good ideas from both of these ideologies and combine. And in general, both of these fractions, in their own way, are right. Both of these fractions complement each other, because if the assassins win, there will be anarchy, and if the Templars win, there will be total control. But, on the other hand, there is an enemy against each system. So that you understand, the debate is still going on, about the rightness of some and not the correctness of others. Although I went too far about the debate, because from the video, I saw only a small kid with a tolerant microphone, who said that “well, Hayetem is normal, so that he is enough, which means the assassins are wrong”, etc. D. and t. p. It is not important, we return to the rightness of some and others.

As an example, take our first goal in AC1, that is, Tamir. He takes people into slavery. Yes, it’s bad. Yes, not everyone is good in slavery. But on the other hand, it would be better if they were killed by drugs and drunkenness on the street, or if they were in slavery, but got a goal in life? And who is the right in this case?

And it would seem, at least a good ideological struggle, which is one of the most important plot lines in AC, is ready and it does not need to be changed.

III part | Retcon

As I said above, yes, there was a retico in acorigins. Moreover, Ubisoft with this reticent, they made themselves worse. What exactly? Let’s explain. In this game, we are shown as Bayek, created the brotherhood of the Assassins in ancient Egypt, about 47 g. BC. e. Not only did the fraternity create 5-6 minutes, but with this decision, the anniversaries missed a bunch of interesting temporary eras and with interesting events, and as a result, in temporary eras to the above the specified year, it will be necessary to come up with endless proto-assassins and proto-cloths.

Okay, I can come to terms with this retic, but with the retic of the ideology of the Assassins, I can’t come to terms with. Unlike the first parts, after the retic, the assassins became stupidly fighters for freedom. The world there, freedom of reason, hatred of dictatorship, well, it’s difficult, you need to think, ambiguity, let’s make stupidly good guys and stupidly bad guys. I generally need to tell what it is fraught with?

By the way of the reticacons: recently, the main screenwriter of the series Darby McDevitt said on Twitter that, for example, one is not the second person of Evor, but Evor himself, just the latter did not remember who he was. Darby compared this to amnesia. And their battle was, a quote “dramatic fence, depicting this inner struggle”. But this Retkon is controversial, because he created a lot of inconsistencies in the plot of the previous parts (yes, this is taken from Wikipedia in the Assassin, but this passage I wrote, therefore, this is my writings).

After the news about these retains, I feel like in that meme with a tesak:

Although Stop, we have everything in modern, so I feel like in that meme with the glory of the CPSU:

All this, because of poor work with a retic. As an example of a good retico, take the same star wars. In the 6th episode, the scene with Obi Kenobi, telling the fate of Anakin, is a retain, because by dialogues in the 4th episode, we can understand that initially, Vader was not planned as the father of Luke. Although … for the most part, this happened in the first trilogy, so this retic is not an example for AC.

IV part | Results

If you summarize, then a good idea with two fractions, spoiled by retains, changes and other. And in general … It’s a shame. Such a cool idea could be developed further, but they wanted to simplify the anniversary. And the point is not even that the simplification is bad, sometimes simplification is necessary, but sometimes, it only spoils the work. As a result, instead of gray morality, we got a simple one: “Go to fight and kill for freedom”. Sad.

Well … That’s all. The article was not as long as I thought, but I don’t know what else to add. Talk about each game, how the brotherhood was depicted there and t. D., well, I do not see any need for this. This article in the principle of some small adventure was held.