One of the most memorable moments in the entire Assassin’s Creed series occurs early in Assassin’s Creed III. Haytham Kenway, having assembled his band of… or so it seems… assassins in the New World, initially appears heroic. He wields a hidden blade, possesses the charisma of Ezio Auditore, and even rescues Native Americans from prison, battling British redcoats. Only his utterance of the familiar Templar phrase, “May the Father of Understanding guide us,” reveals the shocking truth: we've been following the Templars all along.
This surprising twist perfectly embodies Assassin’s Creed’s untapped potential. The first game introduced an intriguing concept—locate, learn about, and eliminate targets—but fell short narratively. Both Altaïr and his victims lacked personality. Assassin’s Creed II improved upon this with the iconic Ezio, yet its adversaries remained underdeveloped, notably Cesare Borgia in Brotherhood. Only in Assassin’s Creed III, set during the American Revolution, did Ubisoft dedicate equal effort to developing both hunter and hunted. This created a seamless narrative flow and achieved a balance of gameplay and storytelling unmatched since.
While the current RPG era enjoys widespread acclaim, many articles, videos, and forum discussions concur that Assassin’s Creed is in decline. The reasons are debated. Some cite increasingly fantastical premises (battles against Anubis and Fenrir), others criticize romance options or, in the controversial case of Assassin’s Creed: Shadow of Memories, the use of the real-world historical figure Yasuke. However, I argue the decline stems from the series’ abandonment of character-driven storytelling, lost within sprawling sandboxes.
Over time, Assassin’s Creed has incorporated RPG and live-service elements: dialogue trees, XP systems, loot boxes, microtransactions, and gear customization. Yet, larger installments feel emptier, not just due to numerous side quests, but also in their storytelling. Although Assassin’s Creed Odyssey boasts more content than Assassin’s Creed II, much feels underdeveloped. While player choice enhances immersion theoretically, longer scripts to accommodate multiple scenarios often lack polish. The focused scripts of the action-adventure era allowed for sharply defined characters, unaffected by player-driven shifts in morality.
The writing has also suffered. Modern games adhere to a simplistic Assassins=good, Templars=bad dichotomy, while earlier games explored the blurred lines between the orders. In Assassin’s Creed III, defeated Templars challenge Connor’s (and the player’s) beliefs. William Johnson suggests the Templars could have prevented genocide. Thomas Hickey criticizes the Assassins’ mission. Benjamin Church emphasizes perspective, highlighting the British viewpoint. Haytham undermines Connor’s faith in Washington, predicting a despotic future—a claim validated when Washington, not Charles Lee, orders Connor’s village burned. The game concludes with more questions than answers, strengthening the narrative.
AnswerSee ResultsThe popularity of “Ezio’s Family” from Assassin’s Creed II’s soundtrack highlights the PS3 era's focus on character-driven narratives. The melancholic melody reflects Ezio’s personal loss, not just the Renaissance setting. While I appreciate the current generation’s world-building and graphics, I hope the franchise will downsize, returning to the focused storytelling that initially captivated audiences. Unfortunately, in a market dominated by sprawling sandboxes and live-service ambitions, this may no longer be considered “good business.”
