AC Syndicate to feature first transgender character

Seriously, Assassin's Creed probably has the dumbest AAA story in gaming. It takes huge liberties in how it connects the real history to their fake one.

The idea that including a transgender in the mix of all this will somehow disrupt the historic balance in these games is just insane.

No, pointing out stupid shit is never stupid...

I didn't say that, putting characters to be token is something i have an issue with. Because again, why does this even exists? It's nothing more than clickbait

I find it funny how some people like to scream "pandering" when minorities and others who have barely ever been represented before in gaming are now finally getting some representation in gaming. As far as I'm concerned they can be in any type of game that it's creators want them to be and they can scream it from the rooftops if they so desire.

So why should straight characters exist? Shouldn't they make all characters asexual and only ever talk about stuff that's absolutely crucial to the main plot?

i wouldn't mind it if that's the reason for the story or the game. If a trans character is there only to be trans, that's different

But what exactly is the issue? These type of games have quite a few different characters, some important, some minor. What harm is done by making one trans?

Like I and others have pointed out, why is this only an issue when the characters aren't straight white men?

Do you bitch and moan when a character is only there to be straight, only there to be male, only there to be female etc? Seriously, you are the problem not the inclusion, pandering or mentioning of any specific group be it majority or minority.

I'm curious as to what people mean by saying "as long as the transgendered person fits the story or premise of the game". Why can't a transgendered person be a tomb raider, street fighter, ninja, soldier, wizard, assassin, etc., etc., etc.

Where have i stated that? I have no issue if a character is well written. Look at the transgendered person in DA I. That is a well written character. This looks to be a token character.

I say this to all characters. If a trans person does not know how to be any of those above, has no character traits and the only thing you really know about the character is the sexual orientation or gender is telling to me.

I also find it funny that people are assuming that this character has just been shoehorned into a story where it makes no sense, even though non of us have played it and we don't know the story yet. Again, that seems like an excuse to complain about there being a trans character.

-Byshop

They have 2 ellie is gay too.

Based on what? You know literally nothing about the character other than that they're a quest giver.

Lets pretend the character is poorly written, why is that such a huge issue? All the Assassins Creed games have had mediocre writing, so why don't you complain about cisgender characters in those games? You seem perfectly fine with mediocrity when it's in something that panders to you, but when done for anyone else it's a issue.

The only ones who have taken an interest in this is the press. Ubisoft are not the ones going out promoting this shit on their blog. It's Gamespot and these other sites. I will admit i don't know anything about the character, but so far that's what it looks like to me.

Actually they aren't Cis gender... Have you played the games? first games: Arabian. Second, third and fourth game: Latino AC 3: Indian AC 4: White AC Unity: White. AC Chronicles: Asian female AC Liberation: Female

Try again

I can't really imagined any character being that non-descript. Why when a topic of a transgendered character being in a game does relevancy suddenly become an issue?

Well clearly other people care too since they read the articles...

I'm lost for words here, I get that cisgender isn't the most common word in the world, but surely the fact that it contains the word gender in it would have been a clue. Do you seriously lack the ability to google a word if you don't know what it means? Yes all those characters are cisgender.

Two points here:

1) I don't know if I'd call Ellie gay. Her best friend was a girl and their relationship looked like it was starting to develop into something more than friendship, but she never got the chance to explore this. She might be gay, or she might not be. She's young enough that she might not even know herself.

2) Bill from The Last of Us is often mentioned as a positive gay character in video games. I'm not sure that I agree. I would consider him to be a pretty neutral gay character because the fact that he's gay doesn't enter into or have any effect on the story whatsoever. As mentioned, you actually have to dig for notes and journals in the game to even find out he's gay. For this character, being gay is about as interchangable as the shirt he's wearing. I think people like him as a gay character because he fulfills a "don't ask don't tell" sort of role. People are fine with a gay character so long as they don't have to deal with any "gayness" in the story.

-Byshop

Well here's what the writer said about it

“It is a little strange when I read stuff like “Oh girls are just confused at that stage.” or “They’re still finding themselves.” You could spend your whole life finding yourself.Again I think it’s weird because if Riley was a boy this debate wouldn’t be happening. No one would say “Oh maybe it’s just a friendly kiss.” No one would question that. I think even if it was two boys I don’t think anybody would question it.We try to write stuff that’s subtle and that can be open for interpretation, even if I disagree with that interpretation. I always say if there’s nothing in the game that disproves it then it doesn’t matter what I say; the material should speak for itself.”

That's an excellent point. I had considered this briefly but even if they were two boys I think I still would have said the same thing. However, I would not have said "she's just confused" or "maybe it's a friendly kiss" because I think those two statements are dismissive.

But at the same time, I'm old and I remember what a dipshit I was in my teenage years and how little of myself I had figured out. Frankly, I don't really see anyone under the age of 18 or so as a "fully formed person" yet.

But if the writer says she's gay then that's pretty much the end of it. I just thought that one kiss didn't necessarily dictate an entire future lifetime's sexual orientation so that was the opinion I had based on the information I had at the time.

-Byshop

@Byshop

I like how you guys are still lashing out at anyone who questions the inclusion as a historical inaccuracy. that means that you support a certain agenda and are a bigot because you attack others for having different views

Yes I'm talking to you byshop and toast

As I said earlier some people have religious grounds to be opposed to transgender. Its not a natural thing so again you cabt compare it to heterosexual "pandering" which isn't pandering because thats how society has always been

Again im not religious but some of you SJW keyboard warriors need to look up the definition of "pandering"

Oh and look up "bigot" as well because thats what you are.

You guys take it personally when people point out how ham fisted the idea seems, that its just done so Ubi can look politically correct and that's what were getting at

It doesn't mean we hate transgender but you guys keep making accusations and being hateful and ignorant.. . Which ironically is what you claim we are.

Dont expect people to respect your views if you can't respect theirs, but then again you guys are keyboard warrior activists with nothing better to do

I doubt most gamers will care one way or the other, I sure don't. Don't see why they have to pat themselves on the back about it though.

Take it easy on the personal attacks (as they are against the rules) and keep it to the topic of the article. If you feel like I said that anyone here hates transgendered people feel free to quote me where I said that.

The way this works is if you disagree, explain why you disagree instead of criticizing the person who disagrees with you.

That applies to everyone here, BTW.

-Byshop

@toast_burner: My gut reaction was to say, "sure that's great! As long as it makes sense!" Then you mentioned that heterosexuals are pandered to constantly in ways that make no sense. So, yes I still hope their use of a transsexual character makes sense but if it doesn't, I guess I don't have any more right to get worked up about this than all of the stuff devs pull in other games like MGSV.

I would wish that all characters in games made sense regardless of who the are pandering to, but such a mindset will only lead to disappointment. You make a very good point about the bigger picture, though.

But can't you say that for anyone? There's never a point when you're "fully formed" you keep on discovering stuff until the day you die. So if someone who's 15 is too young to be considered straight then at what age can we start calling them it? There are plenty of people well into their adult years who don't know exactly what their sexuality is, some spend most their life identifying as straight to then realise that they are gay, to then years after that realise that they're actually bi. And of course there are people who discover their sexuality in their early teens and remain consistent with it for the rest of their lives.

@Byshop:

Feel free to point out where I started personal attacks. Maybe if you actually read the first page of this topic you would notice

that Toast calls me a bigot and starts the personal attacks.

No one was attacking anyone we were having a mature discussion until Toast got here and started LYING about the exact words I said.

What do you call that ?

Look up "personal insults" along with the other terms I asked you to check. Then we can have a discussion, because clearly you're also fixated on me and ignoring the personal insults Toast threw at me.

He even called me a racist which has nothing to do with this.

Again, point out my personal attacks

You know, it'd be great if we could reach a point where all kinds existed in games and nobody made a big deal about it, and people didn't call each other names for having different views.

Also, I've noticed that it always ends up being where one side has a moderator, and that moderator ends up threatening the other side with drummed up charges, while not noticing that other posters on his particular side is doing the exact same thing, but they never get threatened or warned about it. That leads to intimidation and unfairness.

I've seen it happen here in other political threads, and it needs to stop.

If you see something that violates the ToU, flag it and move on and the mod team will deal with it. Do -not- respond by name calling back or escalating. If you can't control yourself, the thread will be locked.

As I said in my previous post, this applies to -everyone- here.

-Byshop

@Zen_Light:

Thank you. For pointing out the hypocrisy.

I dont need to say anything else really. I made all my points respectfully until toast came and IMMEDIATELY called me a bigot and racist

Ah yes the mature discussion on how transsexuals didn't exist in the Victorian era. Are you seriously trying to take the high ground when you said that transsexuals are unnatural?

I didn't call you racist. So now you've not only resorted to blatant transphobia (as opposed to your previous incredibly unsubtle transphobia) but you're also just making shit up as you go along. I'd like to have a mature discussion on this, but that can't happen when people like you try to dehumanise entire groups of people.

@toast_burner:

Its funny you talk about "making" shit up when you directly quote me with a complete false statement which I never said.

And like I said, it was a mature discussion without anyone offending anyone until YOU came and started throwing names at me

Talking about high moral ground.. Your attempts at rational debate are laughable

@airforcedude11: You claim that Byshop and toast_burner are bigots... and yet you are the one making personal attacks and avoiding rational debate. Seriously, go back and read through this thread, toast_burner tries again and again to have civil discourse and ask you meaningful questions but you just respond with personal attacks. Look, your original post was actually kind of interesting and not hateful at all, but the more you responded the more angry your speech became.

Listen to yourself here: "You are getting emotional" - "stop making yourself look stupid" - "You're good at pulling s#%$ out of your ass" - "You're a hateful bigot" - "Put the bong down" - "Oh my, your questions get more and more stupid" - "I feel embarrassed for you"

This kind of speech is meant to harm others rather than promote discussion. Please keep it civil.

As I said earlier some people have religious grounds to be opposed to transgender. Its not a natural thing so again you cabt compare it to heterosexual "pandering" which isn't pandering because thats how society has always been

I'm pretty sure there were no transgender in Victorian times

Yeah I totally just made that stuff up. So seriously you just dehumanised an entire group of people, that really really horrible.

I also like how you say it was a mature discussion before I came in when I was literally the first person to respond.

Some of what you are saying is true--he might have over-reacted a little, but I don't blame him to an extent because toast started the name calling and antagonizing. I think both sides needs to cool off and be more respectful. Seems neither side really wants a true debate, but just wants to judge each other.

You are right, though I think he over-reacted a lot. Post after post of personal attacks long after the other side had ceased doing the same. It bothers me when even in the face of civil questions, people unreasonably continue a campaign designed only to destroy.

it's not, i ask the same question about every character. Why put a certain character in a game if it doesn't serve a purpose to the story. The difference is everytime a minority gets someone announced the media blows it up. They forget to ask the critical questions

The reason it "blows up" is because characters like this have been such a rare occurence so when things start to change it's natural for people to take notice. Why does there even have to be "critical" questions asked? Why does all of a sudden these characters have to serve some grand purpose? They can serve the same purpose as any of the past typical characters in video games.

Yeah, something that is a first is significant when it's a first. When the US elected its first black president reporting on it wasn't "pandering to African Americans". While this isn't uncommon in Japanese "visual novel" type games it's pretty unheard of in other types of games.

-Byshop

I would say that, yes it is significant that its a first, but that doesn't mean we should be more critical of its implementation than we have been with previous characters.

Context mate Context.

Would it make sense to make Master Chief a gay transgender FTM? of course not, and same goes for a lot of other games.

There has to reasonable context for it otherwise it's just moronic.

No, the reason it blows up is because Ubisoft got in "trouble" with a very vocal but very small liberal feminist group which a very liberal gaming media picked up on. So now Ubisoft has gone all in to make their next "AC" game as inclusive as it can be, main protagonist is female, the male is reduced to a sidekick where he is nothing but a ADHD brute who serves no purpose, we have a transgendered quest giver. So they are really pulling all the stops in making Sakarstic happy even though she will never even touch this game.

As to purpose, well of course a character in game has to serve a purpose or making it a certain way has to make sense, anyone who have done any writing knows this. You do not just put in a gay lead because it suits the LGBT community and then not use that. If sexuality has no purpose then do not mention it and let the reader/player/viewer decide.

It's funny how all this talk from SJWs to include the LGBT has just created hostility towards those they want to include, now if developers don't include the LGBT, they're bigots and if they do, they're hopeless panderers.

I don't think it's created any hostility towards them. The people insulting LGBT people already hated them, this is just exposing them for what they are.

@fenrirspack: Which is my point

@Jacanuk: Again, they can serve just as much purpose as any other typical character in any other video game. When it comes to differing types of characters people like you suddenly start shouting "pandering" and "they better serve a purpose" as if it's something new and specific to them. You also like to claim that developers are just "caving" in to demands where in fact the times are simply changing to a more inclusive setting.

Does it make the game better? I doubt it.

I guess I missed the point in gaming history where everything needs to make sense. If you go back to nes era forward you could find hundreds of examples of random moments in gaming history that made no sense at all but were fun and people enjoyed them. (tofu in resident evil, kuma/panda in tekken, every boss of god hand etc). Saying that you are only ok with this if "it makes sense" seems like an excuse, this is not a documentary, it is a video game.

The other thing that annoys me about this thread is that people are choosing to complain about this rather than the real issues that will surround this game. Sure it is not out yet but as gamers we should be complaining about the fact that this dead series is being regurgitated again, the pc version will likely be a buggy unplayable mess, and it will be more likely than not loaded with day 1 dlc and microtransactions.

They are consumers, so therefor have a right to complain about it. Some people aren't comfortable with some characters, and that's well within their rights. Doesn't matter if you like it or not, and as a matter of fact, you guys judging them is just as bad as them judging gays, minorities or trans-gender characters.

Everybody has their own limit to what they find acceptable, and all the judging and name calling in the world will not change that.

And just who are you to pass final judgement on "them" ? Claiming they "hate them" and that it is "exposing them" is ridiculously accusation worthy. You keep making these leaps and calling people names based on wild assumptions while putting words in their mouths.

Don't you have anything better to do than fighting the good fight on the internet with random anonymous people? Why don't you become a lawyer or civil rights advocate and try to do some real good in life instead of this petty shit? You probably think you're serving some kind of justice, but you really are just doing the typical SJW white knighting behavior.

It's highly annoying and rather pointless.

I'm not making any assumptions. OP clearly stated that he thinks transsexuals are unnatural. How is that any better than saying something like "black people are less evolved" or "women should be subservient to men"? This whole intolerant of intolerance thing is completely idiotic.

Why don't you take your own advise? Don't you have anything better to do than defend racists, homophobes, transphobes and sexists on the internet, why not become a lawyer that defends racists?

You're no better than they are, even if what you say is true (which I highly doubt). And calling them names just brings yourself down in the process.