• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The English can't catch a break

Mister Apoc

Demigod of Troll Threads
1588289911570.jpg

King Alfred the Great

-Defends his homeland from Viking Savages
-unified England to become one country essentially saving the country
-portrayed as evil and barbaric

The English can't catch a break even in video games
 

Hawke502

Member
He was the epitome of kingly virtue. There's a reason he's the only king of England granted the epithet of 'great'.

But hurr hurr, montreal soy goys wanted a shit viking game with a probable shaben head lesbo dyke main character.
what, virtuous? a christian? insane. The vikings were right when they chose to invade the country, loot the churches and kill their monks, so woke.
 

GiJoint

Member
Ubisoft are a French dev though right?

I remember when AC3 came out full of jingoistic Independence day style trailers and literally every pre release gameplay footage featuring redcoats getting killed. When questions were raised things were modified so you can hear Conner in a voice over saying he doesn’t fight on any side and a couple of clips of Bluecoat soldiers getting killed.
 
Eurogamer said:
It's in Britain, of course, you'll eventually meet King Alfred, who the trailer paints as the villain of the piece, complete with some Templar-looking artefacts in the background. But Laferrière assures me that Alf will be more of a complex character when you meet him in-game. "He is shown in that [villainous] way in the trailer but over the course of the game you'll see there's a lot more nuance to him," I'm told. The game looks set to cover the Viking campaign against him (the one which led to him being on the run, burning cakes) and his eventual success at pushing the Norse back and unifying swathes of England. "Alfred the Great is a very important historical figure we want to treat right," Laferrière says. "And to do so it's all in the subtleties and nuances you'll find."
 
Yeah...No shit. What were people expecting?

Even after everything UBI/EA/ActiBlizzard and now everyone's perfect prince - Naughty Dog have done to gaming, really can not for the life of me understand why and how people keep supporting these hateful, racist history revisionist and hypocritical developers/publishers.

Hah, he must be joking.
I am from Germany. What should I say! We are technically born 'bad'. 😅

Well, apart from some japanese games that is...

Is this self loathing brought on by the German education system or are you being sarcastic?

I mean they did invade foreign lands, colonized and waged several wars. But yeah, its what we choose to look at.

So did every other peoples. But they dont touch on that when they make games about them, now do they?
 
Last edited:
As much I felt interested in the game...from the look of the teaser I'm pretty sure they gonna piss the viking stuff culture.

Absolutely, you can be sure of that. It's pretty easy to see from the trailer that they sacrificed a lot of historical accuracy and realism for the dudebro videogamez market (+ sjw points).
 
Ubisoft are a French company ...they still haven't forgiven us for Sunday, 18th June 1815. :messenger_winking:

Who cares.. theyre pussies that got what they deserved.

Did France surrender in WWII?

Military history of France during World War II. ... France and Britain declared war on Germany when they invaded Poland in September 1939. After the Phoney War from 1939 to 1940, within seven weeks, the Germans invaded and defeated France and forced the British off the continent. France formally surrendered to Germany.
 
Blame the Vikings
Never thought of it that way. I bet in some weird way, England’s long history fighting foreign invaders (romans, Germanic tribes, Vikings) all prepared them and taught them the value of a proper navy (scale and technology). Which ultimately is what set them apart from the Spaniards and French when it came to colonization.
 
Never thought of it that way. I bet in some weird way, England’s long history fighting foreign invaders (romans, Germanic tribes, Vikings) all prepared them and taught them the value of a proper navy (scale and technology). Which ultimately is what set them apart from the Spaniards and French when it came to colonization.

Who later evolved into the SAS/Seals/Green Berets...spec ops etc all European who do all the dying.

Winston Churchill literally said let the Indians starve to death while taking all their agricultural resources for his own nation.

Got a single NOT hard left leaning source on that?
 
Last edited:

Jbomb19

Member
He was the epitome of kingly virtue. There's a reason he's the only king of England granted the epithet of 'great'.

But hurr hurr, montreal soy goys wanted a shit viking game with a probable shaben head lesbo dyke main character.

the game can’t hurt you, my dude. if it offends you, don’t play it.
 
Last edited:

Nigel

Member
Judging by the leaks you join up with Alfred. Would be pretty horrendous and dumb for them depict Alfred in a poor light.
 

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
I rolled my eyes in the trailer. Alfred was king of Wessex and not King of England. England was his dream during his reign, but he died before he saw it happen. He also did pretty well at beating the shit out of the Vikings.

Anyway, this is Assassin's Creed and the series is not known for its historical accuracy.

I'll still enjoy for what it is.
 

Zannegan

Member
I mean they did invade foreign lands, colonized and waged several wars. But yeah, its what we choose to look at.
The irony here is that they're literally turning the invading, colonizing, war-waging force into the "good guys" in this game, while making the defending Brits cartoonishly evil for no discernible reason. Romanticizing vikings makes even less sense than pirates.

So if you played as monsters like Gengis Khan, Attila and Stalin they would have to be portrayed nobly?

In an Assassin's Creed game? Probably.
 
Last edited:
They used to take women as slaves lmao. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
They used to take so many hundreds of thousands of slaves from the British isles that Dublin was founded by them to function as a hub to organise and industrialise the trade in British slaves to the Middle East, North Africa and Asia.

Sure, they also colonised the North of Britain and Ireland, and interbred with the locals they ruled over, so they didn't murder and enslave everyone, but depicting them as virtuous heroes that the English were wrong to rise up against is incredibly disengenous.

Really I see this as a part of the English/British once again falling victim to our own success, as well as no good deed going unpunished.

It doesn't matter that history is full of everyone being ruthless gits to one another, that the Britains were on the receiving end of conquest, enslavement, oppression and colonisation just as much as everyone else, that we were the first major civilisation and Empire in history to briefly end slavery throughout our lands and most of the rest of the world, or that it was our ideals and concepts of individualism, fairness, democracy and self determination that both ushered in the modern age, with all its freedoms, wealth and progress, and which also lead to the dissolution of the Empire not due to war, disaster or uprisings, but, uniquely, primarily because it was decided to be morally and financially untenable.

Even if everyone else is just as, if not more drenched in blood than you are, it's easy for everyone else to point the finger of blame for the crime at you, when you were the last person holding the knife.
 
Last edited:

Psykodad

Banned
So if you played as monsters like Gengis Khan, Attila and Stalin they would have to be portrayed nobly?
If the game is told from their perspective, then yes.

Pretty simple actually.

Edit:

More like "could" instead of "would have to be".
 
Last edited:
The English do have an history of screwing over other countries (like Ireland and Scotland), maybe that's where the bad image comes from.
Entirely true, although in the context of the era of history we're discussing, it was the Vikings that were conquering, brutally oppressing and enslaving the Scots and Irish, while the English were the only ones to be able to eventually mount a successful counter to the invaders and in the end kick them out of the British Isles entirely.

Scotts also make way too big of a deal about the English. There's just as much blood and plotting on the north of the boarder as the south, but the fact of the matter is the Scotts simply weren't as good at it as the English were.

The Irish did get repeatedly screwed over by the English though, there's no way of looking at that without them coming across as a bunch of cunts. There's a reason no one really ever talks about the massive amount of slaves that were taken from Ireland by the British before the trade was outlawed, and that's primarily because even today mainland Britains find it hard to give a shit about the Irish.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom