Kotaku: Assassin's Creed Odyssey Director Says 'We Missed The Mark' With Controversial DLC

VallenValiant said:

As an outsider looking in, I find it strange that so many are struggling with separating sexual preferences from the duty to procreate.
This isn't even just about gay people; for thousands of years, humanity had men and women who reproduce with each other due to obligation, while feeling no love with each other. This had been the historical NORM. Everyone did this, everywhere, through out time.
If anything, many ancient cultures have openly gay people who married and have children anyway, and at no point did historians single them out for being unusual.

The cultural whiplash here, is that too many people today got used to the idea of not having children, when that was unacceptable even not that long ago. And never mind the idea of marrying someone you don't love.

The game was being ironically historically accurate, its just that the reality stings. Have as many lovers of any gender you want, but you still need a legit heir at some point. Secure the heir, and you are free to go off and love anyone you want afterwards.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Historical accuracy.

Have you played the game? there's a shit ton of Deus Ex Machina involved to get around this, or just don't. People without descendants have existed since the start of times.

At the end though, the problem isn't simply that they did X or Y, is that they lied to par to their fanbase, the ones that are represented in like 1% at most on videogames and this being one of the very few games where they finally got represented.

VallenValiant said:

As an outsider looking in, I find it strange that so many are struggling with separating sexual preferences from the duty to procreate.
This isn't even just about gay people; for thousands of years, humanity had men and women who reproduce with each other due to obligation, while feeling no love with each other. This had been the historical NORM. Everyone did this, everywhere, through out time.
If anything, many ancient cultures have openly gay people who married and have children anyway, and at no point did historians single them out for being unusual.

The cultural whiplash here, is that too many people today got used to the idea of not having children, when that was unacceptable even not that long ago. And never mind the idea of marrying someone you don't love.

The game was being ironically historically accurate, its just that the reality stings. Have as many lovers of any gender you want, but you still need a legit heir at some point. Secure the heir, and you are free to go off and love anyone you want afterwards.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I know you're getting a lot of shit for this but I actually agree with you 100%. Alexios having a kid doesn't affect my feelings toward him as a character, whether gay, bisexual, or straight. Lots of gay men have kids through surrogates, and since that wasn't an option in Ancient Greece there's nothing wrong with impregnating a woman in order to have a child. It doesn't change someone's sexuality.

ZiggyPalffyLA said:

I know you're getting a lot of shit for this but I actually agree with you 100%. Alexios having a kid doesn't affect my feelings toward him as a character, whether gay, bisexual, or straight. Lots of gay men have kids through surrogates, and since that wasn't an option in Ancient Greece there's nothing wrong with impregnating a woman in order to have a child. It doesn't change someone's sexuality.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm glad that your feelings aren't affected, it's a shame that it comes from a place of ignorance. You should probably check out the various posts in here explaining why it's so damaging to us, LGBTQA people, and realize that the world is much bigger than your feelings on the matter. Also, the game goes out of its way to frame it as far more than just a "Utilitarian" option to procreate. The following post illustrates exactly what the game does -

Zero-ELEC said:

Ah, yes, the utilitarian view of crying because a person left, receiving them with obvious joy, claiming to have a "genuine connection" with them, settling down to live with them and their father, kissing them under the moonlight, having a child with them and claiming they are now family.

"Poorly executed" is perhaps a bit mild of a descriptor.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

all the while, adding an achievement that pops after this transpires called "Growing Up". Both you and Vallen should take some time to reflect and see things from another point of view. This was an unforced error that could have been resolved in any dozens of ways, without sacrificing the player's actions as a character, especially when it is something as deeply personal as sexuality. Trying to excuse that is beyond awful.

SpinierBlakeD said:

Just trying to get to the root of the problem. Is the problem the lack of choice? Because the game, like most RPG's really only offers the illusion of choice. Any key story decisions are made without player input and this doesn't seem any different.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There's a few good places to read up on in order to get to the root of the problem! Here's a handful of them to browse at your leisure.

ZiggyPalffyLA said:

I know you're getting a lot of shit for this but I actually agree with you 100%. Alexios having a kid doesn't affect my feelings toward him as a character, whether gay, bisexual, or straight. Lots of gay men have kids through surrogates, and since that wasn't an option in Ancient Greece there's nothing wrong with impregnating a woman in order to have a child. It doesn't change someone's sexuality.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The relationship is clearly framed in an affective way, not simply about "procreation".

You guys got attached to Kassandra/Alexios? Tbh, while they were cool to look at, I never really felt like I was making the decisions, nor did I ever feel like i was really crafting them like a full blown RPG. Dunno, it fell flat with a lot of the RPG elements.

Icemonk191 said:

Too bad the game doesn't make that distinction and instead forces you into a romantic relationship.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The game does specifically make that distinction, although it doesn't make it particularly elegantly given the sappy mismatch between dialogue options and actual dialogue. The player is given a choice between defining the relationship as being about love, or about family. The third episode will likely strengthen this distinction.

Dr. Caroll said:

The game does specifically make that distinction, although it doesn't make it particularly elegantly given the sappy mismatch between dialogue options and actual dialogue. The player is given a choice between defining the relationship as being about love, or about family. The third episode will likely strengthen this distinction.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I wish you could put maybe half as much energy into giving more of a damn about the people this harms than you have writing up posts defending it constantly.

ListeningGarden said:

I wish you could put maybe half as much energy into giving more of a damn about the people this harms than you have writing up posts defending it constantly.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

We're talking about a game series with central story elements so offensive to my deeply held beliefs it came with a disclaimer.

Dr. Caroll said:

We're talking about a game series with central story elements so offensive to my deeply held beliefs it came with a disclaimer.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yet I don't see you making posts quite as long as you tripping over yourself to lay out the plot contrivances surrounding this, which does nothing to actually support the people hurt by this. It has literally been every single one of your posts on the subject over several topics. Also, I would be interested to read a thread by you perhaps discussing said story elements - and I mean that!

Straight people in this thread tripping over themselves to defend homophobia... nothing new there then

I understand the "idea" they had.

But they fucked up big time in how they presented that "choice" (or absence of).

Will be interesting to see how they deal with it future dlcs (and games).

LudicrousSpeed said:

I mean, technically, that would be better. If you're going to create harmful trash, it is definitely better to tell people up front that's your plan than to surprise them with it. But it'd still promote the same harmful ideas regardless of whether they give people a heads up.

This is video games, so even the most up front a game publisher would be with announcing details on content will still be far too late to meaningfully fix fundamental story problems like this.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well, at least there would be more time, and more eyes to see that something would disrupt the outlined "philosophy". I mean some kind of "reproduction focused" DLC would have made a better fit with Origins due to the "one-sided" view.

Also just discussing this and making "reproduction" such a big piece of AC is baffeling to me - who thinks that is a good idea? - No matter what was said about romantic preference freedom.

ChippyTurtle said:

You guys got attached to Kassandra/Alexios? Tbh, while they were cool to look at, I never really felt like I was making the decisions, nor did I ever feel like i was really crafting them like a full blown RPG. Dunno, it fell flat with a lot of the RPG elements.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

because it is RPG lite at best, it gives the illusion of an RPG because it borrows a lot of elements of RPG´s but in the end it is more an action adventure. Horizon did the same with those dialogue choices that lead to nothing, it gives the illusion that the game has "choices" to make even if there are no great choices to make

Its good that they acknowledge they screwed up, but man way to misread your audience.

Good to see the update that they also patch the trophy name. It was too easy to interpret in a harmful way. Unfortunately doing the story again wouldn't be quite as reasonable task but I wish they did it differently from the get-go, they easily could have.

And to anyone talking about "outrage" and "overreactions", I'd remind them of Deus Ex Human Revolution. Now of course the situations aren't entirely equilevant, because of the LGBQT angle with AC. But Eidos also fucked up with the player choice they were promising, regarding being pacifist and how the bosses could be handled. They also ended up saying they're sorry about it and did some changes to the Director's Cut release of the game. You still couldn't be a full pacifist, since some of the bosses died in the cutscenes for narrative reasons. But in the next game they did it better and killing the bosses wasn't required. So to anyone being dismissive of this issue, I'd suggest they take a minute to think that was the criticism towards Human Revolution also "outrage", "overreaction" and "shouldn't have apologized". Or is it just so with AC because it involves the character's sexuality and hence is also "political"? The real life ramifications of something like this makes the disappointment and criticism even more warranted and understandable, not less.

Edit: That said, the game and Ubi aren't far-right or homophobic because of their fuck up. That's definitely hyperbolic.

It's really goddamn gross. Anyone saying they don't understand what the problem is or saying they shouldn't have had to apologize need to listen to what people are saying and educate themselves.

The achievement being called "Growing Up" is what turns this from a stupid writing decision to an absolute mess. Pushing the narrative that the gay relationships that the character engaged in were a phase of sorts and that the forced heterosexual relationship and having a baby was the "adult" or correct choice.

The franchise has weird alien tech and magic. They could have easily found a way around this

sabrina said:

Good for you

fuck off

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Sorry, didnt mean to come off as insensitive.

They needed the baby for story reasons. They don't care that some people played as their character was gay and it sucks... The story involving this baby was probably made up when they were creating the idea of the whole ancient AC trilogy (I assume it will be trilogy).

I got bored after hour so I'm not sure - but are choices in Odyssey important? Or are they mostly "Be nice or be rude"?

Easiest DLC skip of my fucking life.

Potterson said:

They needed the baby for story reasons. They don't care that some people played as their character was gay and it sucks... The story involving this baby was probably made up when they were creating the idea of the whole ancient AC trilogy (I assume it will be trilogy).

I got bored after hour so I'm not sure - but are choices in Odyssey important? Or are they mostly "Be nice or be rude"?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not really. In fact the DLC wasn't written by the main game writter.

MasterOfMagnet said:

I dont understand why your blood is any different from a brothers or sisters at a macro level. We have built in survival strategies to protect family members that are in peril because even if you die off in the process your sibling/family can carry on the vast majority of your genetic imprint.

They could have easily just had your brother/sister carry on the line if they wanted complete freedom of choice

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This is what puzzles me too... They had a narrative 'out' built into the whole premise of the game!

It would still require some handwaving depending on how players handled the family questline but none that would severely undermine player agency.

Kylo Rey said:

Because Ubisoft is far-right that's why. No way a good company who promote the game around "choices" would have let that happen.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not far right but we must aknoweledge that ubisoft is nothing, just a souless corporation.
I mean, in games like watch dogs 2 they are progressive because that is what the setting dictates and in games like Ghost recon wildlands and Division they are full blown far rights.
In order to make money they can be everything.

Sorry for the oftopic but this has to be said.

On topic
Huge mistake from ubisoft, they erased one key selling point of the franchise in it's new form with this one.

Knowing Ubisoft, a very strong and unified community backlash probably could send them rolling this explicit betrayal of their players back wholesale, but because it's hitting marginalised groups hardest and is subject to lots of ignorant dissembly, an excuse and an apology will do.

I'm glad they'll get rid of that "Growing Up" achievement. Whether it was the intention or not, it mirrors real life attitudes we don't need perpetuated. Honestly, even if they were canonically straight, that still would have irritated the hell out of me. Equating having children with growing up is weak.

I'm not sure if I mind the concept of the kid itself though. Assassin's Creed insists on doing the alien-god-blood-hybrid nonsense and seemed to have foreshadowed it. Doesn't even seem too out of character when Kassandra and Alexios are bisexual characters. It was a mistake to give the player the agency to reject those prospective partners when you meet them though. That just gives you the impression your choice matters, when it evidently didn't. Ubisoft only has themselves to blame for the reaction. Hopefully they learn their lessons from this, and maybe give us canonically gay characters in the future.

Persephone said:

Straight people in this thread tripping over themselves to defend homophobia... nothing new there then

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I am glad that in the modern world, people have choice to not have children, to only marry for love, and to love anyone of consenting age regardless of gender.
I am glad it is better than it was used to. But the idea of being in a relationship purely to produce an heir, and make the best of it, was what humanity was stuck with for a long time. Unfortunate, but not monsterious or evil. And certainly not homophobic. No more alien than arranged marriages.

EarthPainting said:

I'm glad they'll get rid of that "Growing Up" achievement. Whether it was the intention or not, it mirrors real life attitudes we don't need perpetuated. Honestly, even if they were canonically straight, that still would have irritated the hell out of me. Equating having children with growing up is weak.

I'm not sure if I mind the concept of the kid itself though. Assassin's Creed insists on doing the alien-god-blood-hybrid nonsense and seemed to have foreshadowed it. Doesn't even seem too out of character when Kassandra and Alexios are bisexual characters. It was a mistake to give the player the agency to reject those prospective partners when you meet them though. That just gives you the impression your choice matters, when it evidently didn't. Ubisoft only has themselves to blame for the reaction. Hopefully they learn their lessons from this, and maybe give us canonically gay characters in the future.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They're not bisexual. They are what the player wanted to be, straight, bi, gay or asexual. That was one of the big PR points before launch and they betrayed that with this DLC.

VallenValiant said:

I am glad that in the modern world, people have choice to not have children, to only marry for love, and to love anyone of consenting age regardless of gender.
I am glad it is better than it was used to. But the idea of being in a relationship purely to produce an heir, and make the best of it, was what humanity was stuck with for a long time. Unfortunate, but not monsterious or evil. And certainly not homophobic. No more alien than arranged marriages.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why you keep insisting in historical accuracy when this game is not historically accurate?

Ferrs said:

They're not bisexual. They are what the player wanted to be, straight, bi, gay or asexual. That was one of the big PR points before launch and they betrayed that with this DLC.



Why you keep insisting in historical accuracy when this game is not historically accurate?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It isn't about accuracy, but about logic. It makes sense. It even makes sense that the protagonist would deliberately try to pretend to love someone, just for the sake of the future child. You don't have to like it or support it, I personally wouldn't do such a thing myself.

I look forward to the day when anyone could have biological children with anyone else, regardless of gender or fertility. Choice isn't just about love or sex, wanting a child is a choice too.

He went on to say that players will not have to continue the romantic relationship in the next installment of the game's DLC, saying the developers wanted players to have the option of deciding that their character choice to procreate was a utilitarian decision rather than a romantic one.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Oh that is nasty as fuck. I don't see much reason to believe these writers have enough talent to make this story good. Best course of action would be to just declare this DLC as corrupted data that never happened.

as long as I skipped this DLC it's not canon for me.

Kassandra is my waifu

Ferrs said:

Historical accuracy.

Have you played the game? there's a shit ton of Deus Ex Machina involved to get around this, or just don't. People without descendants have existed since the start of times.

At the end though, the problem isn't simply that they did X or Y, is that they lied to par to their fanbase, the ones that are represented in like 1% at most on videogames and this being one of the very few games where they finally got represented.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Is that the Minotaur?

VallenValiant said:

It isn't about accuracy, but about logic. It makes sense. It even makes sense that the protagonist would deliberately try to pretend to love someone, just for the sake of the future child. You don't have to like it or support it, I personally wouldn't do such a thing myself.

I look forward to the day when anyone could have biological children with anyone else, regardless of gender or fertility. Choice isn't just about love or sex, wanting a child is a choice too.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

In all of your attempts at logic, you have yet to see the logic clearly laid out in that this was not a problem that had to happen in the first place, with plenty of examples provided on how they could have avoided this entirely in the first place. Any defense of it is misguided at best. Just because something happened doesn't mean it literally could have only ever happened that way because reasons, and Ubisoft's major fuckup was selling a game on something and then forcing something through that completely robbed that personal choice of its meaning. For all of the things they pull in this series, you don't think they could have just... not had this happen at all?

Mazzle said:

Question:
How can you not design new content of a game with lasting character choices and then not include them?
I mean, they knew what game they were working on, right?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Even in the base game, choices barely matter. I played out a few different choices to see what would happen and the outcomes are always very similar.

Feels like the whole dialogue system was tacked on and then used as a marketing point.

ListeningGarden said:

In all of your attempts at logic, you have yet to see the logic clearly laid out in that this was not a problem that had to happen in the first place, with plenty of examples provided on how they could have avoided this entirely in the first place. Any defense of it is misguided at best. Just because something happened doesn't mean it literally could have only ever happened that way because reasons, and Ubisoft's major fuckup was selling a game on something and then forcing something through that completely robbed that personal choice of its meaning. For all of the things they pull in this series, you don't think they could have just... not had this happen at all?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It is only a problem because you find the idea of loveless procreation unacceptable.

VallenValiant said:

It is only a problem because you find the idea of loveless procreation unacceptable.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I have legitimately no more words to say to you.

Aevum said:

Knowing Ubisoft, a very strong and unified community backlash probably could send them rolling this explicit betrayal of their players back wholesale, but because it's hitting marginalised groups hardest and is subject to lots of ignorant dissembly, an excuse and an apology will do.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Ubisoft don't care about "betraying" players narratively. Destroying their agency. Even mocking them through the game. They do that in multiple games and then ignore the outrage. They do care about unintentionally offending players. This DLC questline unintentionally offended players in various aspects. Worse, it contradicts statements made before release, although there are some interpretations that vaguely allow what they've done. It's basically Ubisoft's version of the statement Bioware made before release about ME3's ending. If you say one thing and then do another thing, people get upset. Rightfully so, to varying degrees.

There are multiple complaints of varying degrees of sensibility. Ubisoft are willing to make slight changes (such as renaming the achievement) to alleviate some of those concerns. And that's respectable. That's a developer that listens to its community and isn't a dick. They can't please everyone but they can try to avoid carelessly upsetting players for no good reason.

But like I say, this is a fairly special case. Far Cry 5 demonstrates Ubisoft's willingness to smash the players in the face with a shovel and then smugly ignore their howls of anguish -- then announce a sequel that firmly cements said the game's ending as canon. This ending spawned an unbelievable wave of upset. I remember people on social media finishing the game and then talking about how they were so angry they were shaking. They felt the implications of the ending were a moral violation.


Far Cry 5 is a textbook example of "strong and unified community backlash". But it's also an example of Ubisoft sticking to their guns because they had a story to tell, and a sequel already in development. People are still angry. That single scene made thousands and thousands of players -- potentially millions -- be so disgusted that they never wanted to play the game again. it was dead to them. They went from loving the game to despising it within minutes. A number desperately tried to cling to "it was all a dream" conspiracy theories because the game's ending was so upsetting for them.

VallenValiant said:

It isn't about accuracy, but about logic. It makes sense. It even makes sense that the protagonist would deliberately try to pretend to love someone, just for the sake of the future child. You don't have to like it or support it, I personally wouldn't do such a thing myself.

I look forward to the day when anyone could have biological children with anyone else, regardless of gender or fertility. Choice isn't just about love or sex, wanting a child is a choice too.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This is a game where (big Odyssey spoilers)
With that being said I still don't agree with the idea that the character needs to have a child be for romantic interest or just for procreation, if you tie this with their old LGBT PR push it's kind of a toxic message, and no matter what kind of historical logic idea you may have in your head (are you telling me that people without descendants didn't exist in Greece?) it's still a bad message to do in 2018.

Despite the apology Ubisoft seems to be doubling down on the decision and I don't understand why. Having a child out of a sense of duty isn't actually a very interesting idea at all, at least in comparison to the story that the player has created in their own playthrough that the DLC actively undermines. "Letting" the player decide the motivation for their playable character is a just a shitty consolation prize to stepping over the agency that they had promised players in the main game. By removing a choice that matters greatly to players they're instead substituting it with one that doesn't matter at all. For a story idea that sounds really dull.

Once again, it's great to see all the straights going on and on about the "duty to procreate"...

Oddish1 said:

Despite the apology Ubisoft seems to be doubling down on the decision and I don't understand why. Having a child out of a sense of duty isn't actually a very interesting idea at all, at least in comparison to the story that the player has created in their own playthrough that the DLC actively undermines. "Letting" the player decide the motivation for their playable character is a just a shitty consolation prize to stepping over the agency that they had promised players in the main game. By removing a choice that matters greatly to players they're instead substituting it with one that doesn't matter at all. For a story idea that sounds really dull.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Probably because the third episode of this piece of DLC is already deep into development and changing things now would take too much work and time. It sucks but it makes sense sadly.

Oreiller said:

Once again, it's great to see all the straights going on and on about the "duty to procreate"...


Probably because the third episode of this piece of DLC is already deep into development and changing things now would take too much work and time. It sucks but it makes sense sadly.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Probably. I guess I would think they would do something more to "fix" it. Something more than just offering an apology and making the story more "clear" but otherwise going full steam ahead. But then again, that would probably cost them too much money to actually make their games inclusive.

WastedDeer said:

Just curious how they could continue the bloodline without having a baby? I'm not debating the stupidity of going down this forced route. (It is and they should have left it well alone) Just wondering what you think they could have done different if they were determined to include a dlc like this.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

On the assumption that they are absolutely, resolutely determined to have the protagonist have a child (which I think wasn't necessary, but whatever, running with it), then for this DLC I would have done this:

1. The game scans the player's save and checks who they've had romances with up to that point. If mostly male, Darius has a son. If mostly female, Darius has a daughter. If the male/female numbers are pretty close or if the number is 0, the game flips a coin.

2. DLC episode 1 introduces Darius alongside his son or daughter. Regardless of the sex of the character, they are a single parent of an existing child.

3. The story of DLC episode 1 is altered slightly to accommodate this. The child's existence adds a new perspective - Darius' family are not just a group of two capable warriors. The group also includes the child, making them more vulnerable and making their flight from Persia more desperate. The child also offers a natural opportunity for the protagonist to talk about family, and his or her desire for a family (or lack of that desire). Other than this the rest of the episode is largely unchanged.

4. During DLC episode 2 the protagonist and Darius' son/daughter can optionally start a relationship. This isn't to have a child, it's just an option. The focus in terms of a child is still on Darius's grandson or granddaughter, and the protagonist is given lots of opportunities to interact with the child. This drastically changes the relationship portion of episode 2 but the rest can still be kept.

5. During DLC episode 3, the child is kidnapped, brought to the ruins of a formerly unknown Isu facility and, during the course of events, is badly injured. Hippokrates is summoned and, after consultation with Darius , determines that the only way to save the child is to use the surrounding Isu tech to do a blood transfusion. However, the tech only works for the protagonist. It works, and the child is saved.

6. DLC episode 3 closes with the Order of the Ancients defeated in Greece, the protagonist training the child in scenes very similar to the game's earlier flashbacks, and the child picking up the Spear of Leonidas, which starts glowing, showing that the child is now, in some way, part of the protagonist's bloodline.

Xharos said:

Genuine question with no hidden intentions or anything like that:
Is Kassandra supposed to ever have children, canonically? Does she have direct blood descendants in the lore?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

None that are known based on the game as originally released. Unfortunately that has now changed.

They should have included a number of variations in the DLC for the purpose of achieving the same goal through different means and not crafting the key content by assuming the player was exclusively picking one orientation.

It's true that several queer indivuals still got married out of obligation and had children in the ancient world, even if their actual love was for someone else, but that wasn't the only option. For instance, other people simply adopted someone and the family line was officially expanded that way. They could have gone with that second route and perhaps used some sort of supernatural angle to affect the relevant bloodline in the process, thus that could give more weight and flexibility to the choices made by queer players.

I find it funny more than anything else, like I love games are trying to be inclusive but if you hired anyone that was actually lgbtq in the writing department this wouldn't have happened. It feels pretty silly this wasn't considered but it also shows me the writing really wasn't a priority

Mazzle said:

Question:
How can you not design new content of a game with lasting character choices and then not include them?
I mean, they knew what game they were working on, right?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

im not defending him but not one of my sex / relationships choices in the game had a lasting character effect within the game

ChippyTurtle said:

Sorry, didnt mean to come off as insensitive.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why are you saying sorry? That person who replied to told you to fuck off for absolutely not reason.

You literally said you didn't feel that connected to the character and you got told to fuck off.

Evil Monkey DTT said:

I find it funny more than anything else, like I love games are trying to be inclusive but if you hired anyone that was actually lgbtq in the writing department this wouldn't have happened. It feels pretty silly this wasn't considered but it also shows me the writing really wasn't a priority

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Well, that's the thing, the writing director for this game identifies as pansexual. She was not involved in the DLC apparently but still....

Xharos said:

Genuine question with no hidden intentions or anything like that:
Is Kassandra supposed to ever have children, canonically? Does she have direct blood descendants in the lore?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not yet, but this probably will be the plot of the 3rd episode. The director said that "the intention of this story was to explain how your character's bloodline has a lasting impact on the Assassins"

For someone who hasnt placed, what is the dlc thing?

Ubisoft dug their own grave imo when they gave the players full freedom in terms of picking their character's sexual preferences. There are no lasting relationships in the main game and the romances play out exactly the same for both Alexios and Kassandra. It's like they sacrificed romancing with actually interesting, deep characters so that everyone could find the option they're interested in without missing out on any interactions.

This is Rainbow Capitalism at its finest. Parade your product as being inclusive to the LGBT community then pull out the rug out after you've got all the sales.