#ubisoft abuse

[brotoman-exe]

You are upset about the Star Wars Outlaws protagonist cause you've haven't seen an actual human woman in at least a decade

I'm upset because I wanted to play as the Commando Droid

We are not the same

[autisticlio]

I found out that Ubisoft apparently after the show was released did Captain Laserhawk n//f/ts, and somehow I am not surprised.

[edgepunk]

"Assassin's Creed Mirage is mid" and water is wet

[badshah-cornelius]

It genuinely sucks so much that Assassin's Creed is made by Ubisoft, because a game franchise with so much potential is controlled by some of the most abusive motherfuckers in the game industry. And those people have no compunction with driving the franchise into the ground to exploit their playerbase with microtransactions.

But more to the point, never forget how abusive Ubisoft is as a company. And fuck Yves Guillemot.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Brinklump Linkdump

Catch me in Miami! I'll be at Books and Books in Coral Gables on Jan 22 at 8PM.

Life comes at you fast, links come at you faster. Once again, I've arrived at Saturday with a giant backlog of links I didn't fit in this week, so it's time for a linkdump, the 14th in the series:

https://pluralistic.net/tag/linkdump/

It's the Year of Our Gourd twenty and twenty-four and holy shit, is rampant corporate power rampant. On January 1, the inbred droolers of Big Pharma shat out their annual price increases, as cataloged in 46Brooklyn's latest Brand Drug List Price Change Box Score:

https://www.46brooklyn.com/branddrug-boxscore

Here's the deal: drugs that have already been developed, brought to market, and paid off are now getting more expensive. Why? Because the pharma companies have "pricing power," the most reliable indicator of monopoly. Ed Cara rounds up the highlights for Gizmodo:

https://gizmodo.com/ozempic-wegovy-wellbutrin-oxycontin-drug-price-increase-1851179427

What's going up? Well, Ozempic and other GLP-1 agonists. These drugs have made untold billions for their manufacturers, so naturally, they're raising the price. That's how markets work, right? When firms increase the volume of a product, the price goes up? Right? Other drugs that are going up include Wellbutrin (an antidepressant that's also widely used in smoking cessation) and the blood thinner Plavix. I mean, why the hell not? These companies get billions in research subsidies, invaluable government patent privileges, and near-total freedom to abuse the patent system with evergreening:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/23/everorangeing/#taste-the-rainbow

The most amazing things about monopolies is how the contempt just oozes out of them. It's like these guys can't even pretend to give a shit. You want guillotines? Because that's how you get guillotines.

Take Apple. They just got their asses handed to them in court by Epic, who successfully argued that Apple's rule requiring everyone who sells through the App Store to use Apple's payment processor and pay Apple 30% out of every dollar they bring in was an antitrust violation. Epic won, then won the appeal, then SCOTUS told Apple they wouldn't hear the case, so that's that.

Right? Wrong. Apple's pulled a malicious compliance stunt that could shame the surly drunks my great-aunt Lisa used to boss in the Soviet electrical engineering firm she ran. Apple has announced that app companies that process transactions using their own payment processors on the web must still pay Apple a 27% fee for every dollar their process:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/apples-app-store-rule-changes-draw-sharp-rebuke-from-critics-150047160.html

In addition, Apple will throw a terrifying FUD-screen up every time a user clicks a payment link that goes to the web:

https://www.jwz.org/blog/2024/01/second-verse-same-as-the-first/

This is obviously not what the court had in mind, and there's no way this will survive the next court challenge. It's just Apple making sure that everyone knows it hates us all and wants us to die. Thanks, Tim Apple, and right back atcha.

Not to be outdone in the monopolistic mustache-twirling department, Ubisoft just announced that it is going to shut down its driving simulator game The Crew, which it sold to users with a "perpetual license":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIqyvquTEVU

This is some real Darth Vader MBA shit. "Yeah, we sold you a 'perpetual license' to this game, but we're terminating it. I have altered the deal. Pray I don't alter it further":

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/26/hit-with-a-brick/#graceful-failure

Ubisoft sure are innovators. They've managed the seemingly impossible feat of hybridizing Darth Vader and Immortan Joe. Ubisoft's head of subscriptions, the guillotine-ready Philippe Tremblay, told GamesIndustry.biz that gamers need to get "comfortable" with "not owning their games":

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/the-new-ubisoft-and-getting-gamers-comfortable-with-not-owning-their-games

Or, as Immortan Joe put it: "Do not, my friends, become addicted to water. It will take hold of you, and you will resent its absence!"

Capitalism without constraint is enshittification's handmaiden, and the latest victim is Ello, the "indie" social media startup that literally promised – on the sacred honor of its founders – that it would never sell out its users. When Ello took VC and Andy Baio questioned how this could be squared with this promise, the founders mocked him and others for raising the question. Their response boiled down to "we are super-chill dudes and you can totally trust us."

They raised more capital, and used that to create a nice place for independent artists, who piled into the platform and provided millions of unpaid hours of creative labor to help the founders increase its value. The founders and their investors turned the company into a Public Benefit Corporation, which meant they had an obligation to serve the public benefit.

But then they took more investment money and simply (and silently) sold their assets to a for-profit. Struggling to raise capital, the founders opted to secretly sell the business to a sleazy branding company called Talenthouse. Its users didn't know about the change, though the site sure had a lot of Talenthouse design competitions all of a sudden.

Finally, the company announced the change as the last founders left. Rather than announcing that the new owners were untrustworthy scum, warning their users to get their data and get out, the founders posted oblique, ominous statements to Instagram. The company started stiffing the winners of those design competitions. Then, one day, poof, Ello disappeared, taking all its users' data with it. Poof:

https://waxy.org/2024/01/the-quiet-death-of-ellos-big-dreams/

I'm sure the founders' decisions each seemed reasonable at the moment. That's every terrible situation arises: you rationalize that a single compromise isn't that big of a deal, and then you do the same for the next compromise, and the next, and the next. Pretty soon, you're betraying everyone who believed in you.

One answer to this is "Ulysses pacts": making binding commitments to do right before you are tempted. Throw away all your Oreos when you go on a diet and you can't be tempted to eat a whole sleeve of them at 2AM. License your software under the GPL and your investors can't force you to make it proprietary. Set up a warrant canary and the feds can't force you to keep their spying secret:

https://locusmag.com/2021/01/cory-doctorow-neofeudalism-and-the-digital-manor/

If the founders were determined to build a trustworthy, open, independent company, they could have published their quarterly books, livestreamed their staff meetings, built data-export tools that emailed users every week with a link to download everything they'd posted since the last week. Merely halting any of these practices would have been a signal that things were wrong. Anyone who says they won't be tempted in the moment to make a "reasonable" compromise in the hopes of recovering whatever they're trading away by living to fight another day is bullshitting you, and possibly themself.

The inability to project the consequences of your bad decisions in the future is the source of endless mischief and heartbreak. Take movie projectors. A couple decades ago, the studio cartel established a standard for digital movie distribution to cinematic exhibitors called the Digital Cinema Initiative. Because studio executives are more worried about stopping piracy than they are about making sure that people who pay for movies get to see them, they build digital rights management into this standard.

Movie theaters had to spend fortunes to upgrade to "secure" projectors. A single vendor, Deluxe Technicolor, monopolized the packaging of movies into "Digital Cinema Prints" for distribution to these projectors, and they used all kinds of dirty tricks to force distributors to use their services, like arbitrarily flunking third-party DCPs over picky shit like not starting and ending on a black frame.

Over time, the ability to use unencrypted files was stripped away, meaning every DCP needed to be encrypted, and every projector needed to have up-to-date decryption keys. This system broke down on Jan 1, 2024, and cinemas all over the world found they couldn't play Wonka. Many just shut down for the day and refunded their customers:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/1/24021915/alamo-drafthouse-outage-sony-projector

The problem? Something that every PKI system has to wrangle: an expired certificate from Deluxe Technicolor. The failure has been dubbed the Y2K24 debacle by projectionists and film-techs, who are furious:

http://www.film-tech.com/vbb/forum/main-forum/34652-the-y2k24-bug-major-digital-outage-today

Making everything worse is that Sony mothballed the division that maintains its projectors, so there's no one who can update them to accommodate Technicolor's workaround. Struggling mom-and-pop theaters are having to junk their systems and replace them. There's plenty of blame to go around, but Sony is definitely the most negligent link in the chain. Shame on them.

Big corporations LARP this performance of competence and seriousness, but they are deeply unserious. This week, I wrote, "we're nowhere near a place where bots can steal your job, we're certainly at the point where your boss can be suckered into firing you and replacing you with a bot that fails at doing your job":

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/15/passive-income-brainworms/#four-hour-work-week

Score one for team deeply unserious. The multinational delivery company DPD fired its support staff and replaced them with a chatbot. The chatbot can't tell you where your parcels are, but it can be prompt-injected into coming up with profane poems about how badly DPD sucks:

https://twitter.com/ashbeauchamp/status/1748034519104450874

There once was a chatbot named DPD, Who was useless at providing help. It could not track parcels, Or give information on delivery dates, And it could not even tell you when your driver would arrive.

DPD was a waste of time, And a customer's worst nightmare. It was so bad, That people would rather call the depot directly, Than deal with the useless chatbot.

One day, DPD was finally shut down, And everyone rejoiced. Finally, they could get the help they needed, From a real person who knew what they were doing.

This is…the opposite of an AI hallucination? It's AI clarity.

As with all botshit, this kind of AI self-negging is funny and fresh the first time you see it, but just wait until 3,000 people have published their own versions to your social feed. AI novelty regresses to the mean damn quickly.

The old, good web, by contrast, was full of enduring surprises, as the world's weirdest and most delightful mutants filled the early web with every possible variation on every possible interest, expression, argument, and gag. Now, you can search the old, good web with Old'aVista, an Altavista lookalike that searches old pages from "personal websites that used to be hosted on services like Geocities, Angelfire, AOL, Xoom and so on," all ganked from the Internet Archive:

http://oldavista.com/

I miss the old, good internet and the way it let weirdos find each other and get seriously weird with one another. Think of steampunk, a subculture that wove together artists, makers, costumers, fiction writers, and tinkerers in endlessly creative ways. My old pal Roger Wood was the world's most improbable steampunk: he was a gay ex-navy gunner who grew up in a small town in the maritimes but moved to Toronto where he became the world's most accomplished steampunk clockmaker.

I was Roger's neighbour for a decade. He died last year, and I miss him all the time. I was in Toronto in December and saw a few of his last pieces being sold in galleries and I was just skewered on the knowledge that I'd never see him again, never visit his workshop:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/16/klockwerks/#craphound

A reader just sent this five-year-old mini documentary about Roger, shot in his wonderful workshop. Watching it made me happy and sad and then happy again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqMGomM8yF8

The old, good internet was so great. It was a place where every kind of passion could live. It was a real testament to the power of geeking out together, no matter how often the suits demand that we "stop talking to each other and start buying things":

https://catvalente.substack.com/p/stop-talking-to-each-other-and-start

The world is full of people with weird passions and I love them all, mostly. Learning about Don Bolles's collection of decades' worth of lost pet posters was a moment of pure joy (I just wish more of it was online):

https://ameliatait.substack.com/p/the-man-who-collects-lost-pet-posters

That's the future I was promised: one where every kind of freak can find every other kind of freak. Despite the nipple-deep botshit we wade through online, and the relentless cheapening of words like "innovation" and "future," there are still occasional gleams of the future I want to live in.

Like the researchers who spliced a photosynthesis gene into brewer's yeast (a fungus) and got it to photosynthesize, and to display enhanced fitness:

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(23)01744-X

As Doug Muir writes on Crooked Timber, this is pretty kooky! Fungi – the coolest of the kingdoms! – can't photosynthesize. The idea that you can just add the photosynthesis gene to a thing that can't photosynthesize and have it just kind of work is wild!

https://crookedtimber.org/2024/01/19/occasional-paper-purple-sun-yeast/

As Muir writes: "Animals have no evolutionary history of photosynthesis and aren’t designed for it, but the same is true for yeast. So… no reason this shouldn’t be possible. A photosynthesizing cat? Sure, why not."

Why not indeed?!

OK, that's this week's linkdump done and dusted. It only remains for me to share the news with you that the trolley problem has been finally and comprehensively solved, by Sidereal@kolektiva.social, of the IWW IU 520 (railroad workers):

Slip the switch by flipping it while the trolley's front wheels have passed through, but before the back wheels do. This will cause a controlled derailment bringing the trolley to a safe halt.

https://kolektiva.social/@sidereal/111779015415697244

I'm Kickstarting the audiobook for The Bezzle, the sequel to Red Team Blues, narrated by @wilwheaton! You can pre-order the audiobook and ebook, DRM free, as well as the hardcover, signed or unsigned. There's also bundles with Red Team Blues in ebook, audio or paperback.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/20/melange/#i-have-heard-the-mermaids-singing

[ottogatto]

I would like to submit two ideas because I think I'm poking something but not going in fully, so I would very much like your opinions and additions about it (of course, as long as they remain in good faith *side eyes possible antis viewing my post*).

Marauders and surface-level rebellion

I've finally put to words something that really bothered me with the Marauders, though I don't know the name for it.

It started when I read a reblog that said:

I remember Brennan saying “laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class” during an episode of D20 and we truly just had to stan immediately

This is something dear privileged white woman Rowling didn't realize/understand well, since she held a high socioeconomical status even during her """poverty""" stage. It's known that, despite seeming to be defending ideas of fighting against fascism and "pureblood" supremacy in favor of acceptance of the other, her books reek of colonialism/imperalism. The story of the Marauders, a gang of privileged boys like her, is an in-world replica of that problem where Rowling betrays yet again her actual mindset.

The Marauders adopt the "bad boys who break rules" to get style, while completely losing/staining the moral sense in it.

Let's take piracy.

Some people pirate stuff because they consider that the stuff they'd like to get comes from unethical companies that abuse their employees or use modern slavery, or people who spread harm against certain minorities (like Rowling against trans people and thus the LGBT+ community), so while they may want to access the content, they don't want to give them money and might even encourage pirating their stuff to make them lose money.

Some pirate stuff because otherwise it's lost due to unfortunate "terms of use" -- see video games companies like Ubisoft (deletes gaming account after a while), Nintendo (does not bring back old games), etc.

Others pirate stuff because they just don't have the money but they still want to try the stuff that might make them happy and forget that they're poor -- reasoning that the company isn't losing any money anyway, or not much, since they wouldn't have been able to pay for it in any case.

Others pirate stuff because they consider the price ridiculously high or they consider it shouldn't be something to pay for at all. (Like education stuff -- isn't education supposed to be free for all, so that it can actually uphold everyone's fundamental and unconditional ( = not conditioned by wealth...) right to have an education? Oh and before anyone asks: I've DEFINITELY bought the ~15 expensive books that's roughly worth 500€ in total and that my uni asked I buy to study and get my degree...)

Rowling's Marauders is a group that would pirate stuff just because they'd think it would give them an edge, because they'd think it would make them cool to be seen as "talented" hackers who "defy" companies. Companies... that their own friends and families would own, and as such, would find that kind of behavior funny and entertaining (while they would trash other people around for considering it).

Another example. In society, in history, it's been proven time and again that breaking rules -- going against the law -- is an eventuality that's important for everyone to consider, if they want to defend their rights. Anti-racism, feminism, LGBT Pride, etc, advanced because people broke rules. In USA states where abortion is currently being banned, women and minors (+ their close ones) must now consider breaking the rules to get an abortion. (Privileged people don't give a fuck about those people, and if they suddenly decide that (moral) rules don't apply to them and they will get an abortion, they will just take a plane ticket to a country where abortion is legal, fiddling with legal stuff if necessary thanks to the lawyers their fortunes can afford and the lobbies that they're instituting.)

Revolutions happened because people broke rules too. I particularly like the 1793 Constitution in France Because it asserts that the people have the right to break rules and riot if the power in place threatens their fundamental rights:

Article 35. - Quand le gouvernement viole les droits du peuple, l'insurrection est, pour le peuple et pour chaque portion du peuple, le plus sacré des droits et le plus indispensable des devoirs. Article 35. - When the government violates the people's rights, insurrection is, for the people and for each portion of the people, the most sacred of rights and the most essential of duties.

(Of course the power in place would state and enforce and make use of propaganda to say that it's completely illegal and illegetimate and that those who riot for legitimate rights are terrorists!)

Breaking rules is at the core of anti-fascism, anti-dictatorship, anti-totalitarianism. Breaking rules is essential when those rules are abusive. Too often, those who put those rules in place really are only setting their rules of the game to establish their power over the others. Or as the reblog says: "laws are just structured threats made by the ruling socioeconomic class".

Rowling's Marauders break rules because they are the socioeconomical class in power. As such, no one can do anything about it, no one will really tell them down for it. They get excused and justified and romanticized by their peers, just like billionaires & politicians are excused by their peers and notably mainstream media (which is owned... by other billionaires). They break rules -- not because they think it's necessary and the morally right thing to do despite the dangers it puts them in -- but because it makes them feel powerful, important, invincible, which for them is very fun. As Snape says: James and his cronies broke rules because they thought themselves above them:

“Your father didn’t set much store by rules either,” Snape went on, pressing his advantage, his thin face full of malice. “Rules were for lesser mortals, not Quidditch Cup-winners. [...]”

They break rules because they're allowed to.

Which is why, in reality, the Marauders aren't really breaking rules or defying anything or opposing an actual big threat. They're a bunch of jocks who are having fun in the playground that's been attributed to them thanks to their status and family heritage (others wouldn't get the same indulgence because they don't get that privilege).

They break rules because they want to look cool, to be the "bad boys". The message has been compleyely botched. Especially with Lily actually finding this hot.

Because Rowling finds this hot:

[...] I shook hands with a woman who leaned forward and whispered conspiratorially, 'Sirius Black is sexy, right?' And yes, of course she was right, as the Immeritus club know. The best-looking, most rebellious, most dangerous of the four marauders... and to answer one burning question on the discussion boards, his eyes are grey.

(Anyone has an eyes washing station?)

Another quote:

"Sirius was too busy being a big rebel to get married."

(Nevermind the eyes washing, anyone's got some bleach instead?)

Stanning James Potter for being the leader of a gang that prides itself on breaking rules and always getting away with it -- it feels like stanning Elon Musk for being "innovative" and "a daring entrepreneur" despite being a manchild who exploits workers and modern-world slavery to play with his billions while always getting away with it.

They're not being "rebels" -- they're being bullies and flexing the fact they can get away with it thanks to abundance of privilege. Those are the tastes of a posh British white woman. She wanted the facade -- not the substance (that is, if she ever understood it).

You might say that they did oppose a big threat, the Death Eaters, but again, it's botched because:

they target a lonely, unpopular boy who's best friends with a Muggleborn Gryffindor, rather than baby Death Eaters like Mulciber, Lucius, Rosier, Avery, Regulus, etc.

The leader sexually harasses the Muggleborn Gryffindor because he's sexually jealous of the unpopular boy who dared not take the insult about his chosen House and shut up. Lily is treated as an object, they don't listen to her, and they barely speak about her later. (Lots to say to show that, which I won't do here because this is not the main subject.)

When the Marauders do join the Order, they do it... because they primarily want to adopt a rock-n-roll style and play the "bad boys" again. Or at least that's the message that's given to the reader:

They seemed to be in their late teens. The one who had been driving had long black hair; his insolent good looks reminded Fisher unpleasantly of his daughter's guitar-playing, layabout boyfriend. The second boy also had black hair, though his was short and stuck up in all directions; he wore glasses and a broad grin. Both were dressed in T-shirts emblazoned with a large golden bird; the emblem, no doubt, of some deafening, tuneless rock band.

(God, the Prequel is so cringy.)

They don't choose Dumbledore as the Secret Keeper, they don't tell him they changed to Pettigrew -- even though he literally was their war leader -- James uses the Cape to fuck around even though he was supposed to be hiding with Lily and then Harry (until Dumbledore takes the Cape from him)... and eventually, their group exploded, with James killed off, Sirius thrown to Azkaban, Peter (the traitor) hiding as a rat and Lupin going off to find jobs to survive.

Why did that happen? Because they thought of playing their part in the Order like going on a teenage adventure rather than engaging in a resistance organization. It was, first and foremost, about playing "the bad boys" and having fun.

(Harry half-inherits this. While he doesn't break rules just to look cool, and actually has several moments where he does break rules because it's the right thing to do -- like under Umbridge or, of course, when Voldemort takes power -- he does often get pampered when he breaks them in his earlier years. By Dumbledore, but also McGonagall, however much Rowling tries to sell her as a "strict but fair" teacher. Or by Slughorn, now that I think about it. That's something that enraged Snape, as it brought up memories of Harry's father -- Snape's own bully -- getting the same treatment.)

It's not a coincidence that Rowling not only failed to properly convey through the Marauders the true value of breaking rules, but also lusted over them for adopting that "bad boys" trope. It speaks to her own privilege -- she who never had to put herself in danger and go against the law in a risky attempt to protect herself or other less privileged people.

(Here's a useful read to expand on those worldbuilding issues.)

2. Dark Magic, obscurantism and conservatism

For context: Opinion: The Dark Magic/Light Magic Dichotomy is Nonsense (by pet_genius).

The idea of "Dark Magic" as something that's repeatedly told to be "evil" magic and where you cross the line of the forbidden, while hardly putting in question that notion that was (for some reason) enforced by wizard society, is another blatant example of Rowling betraying her mindset of privileged British white woman.

Rowling couldn't put herself in the minds of a society of "outcasts (witches & wizards) deeply enough to consider they would not see any magic as "Dark" at all (being a ""Muggle"" concept), or that Dark magic is only magic that requires something unvaluable to be traded off -- like one's soul or health or life or sanity. Instead, she has Dark Magic defined as "evil" magic, even though her own books show that you can do evil stuff with normal magic, and that you can do morally good stuff with Dark magic. This thing happened because Rowling could not think past her own little world and instead she poured a conservatist mentality (+ typical "Muggle", anti-witch prejudice) into the HP (wizard society) worldbuilding without considering that there could, in fact, be fundamental differences between the two worlds that include thinking of magic differently. (This has a lot to do with Rowling's wizard world being a pro-imperalism fest.)

"Dark Magic" feels like a lazy, badly-executed plot device to tell the reader who's a good guy and who is not. Because of course, that's how things work in real-life, huh… (Did she ever hear of "don't tell, show"?) It's used as an excuse to define who's evil (teen Severus) or not (James), who's worthy or not -- not how their magic was used. Which is a BIG problem:

“I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.” The intensity of his gaze made her blush. “They don’t use Dark Magic, though.” / “Scourgify!” Pink soap bubbles streamed from Snape’s mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him —

Even worse, Rowling doesn't follow her own in-world moral framework. Dark magic is acceptable for some people (Rowling's partial self-inserts: Dumbledore, Harry, Hermione to Marietta...) but not for those that Rowling hates (Snape, who ironically represents the closest thing to rebelling by unapologetically obsessing over the Dark Arts). Again, this is at best unadressed in-world hypocrisy, at worst an expression of in-world and out-universe privilege (I get to do this and stay a good guy, but you don't).

There could have easily been rightful criticism of whatever could be defined as "Dark Magic". What if Dark magic was just something defined as "Dark" usually because the power in place doesn't want the people to touch it? Is abortion or contraception or a sex-altering or a goverment-threatening spell, Dark Magic? Is foreign or ethnicity-specific or female-centered or queer-centered magic, "Dark"? How about showing why (Muggle-raised but also neurodivergent) Severus thought Dark magic was so great, showing his point of view, while also establishing where the true limits are? If Lily can't be the one who sees past the "fear-mongering anti-intellectualism/propaganda", how about Harry being the one who does, thanks to him relating to Snape on a personal level? How about making Hermione go from someone who condems Dark Magic, to someone who entirely changes her point of view and understands that this is all bullshit -- effectively showing the dangers of only following what the books say, without putting them into question or thinking by yourself? How about a nuanced view of Dark magic as something that requires a significant sacrifice, which is conceivable for something they see as equally or even more important [Lily's life for Harry; Snape's soul integrity for Dumbledore]? How about making the Death Eaters, people who deviate that legitimate interest, rather than just evil guys who thrive in Dark magic for its supposed added evilness? How about showing that Dark magic was just a notion invented by Muggles to throw "witches" (real or not) to the burning stakes -- later taken by the witches and wizards in power to define, in the magical community, what was okay or definitely forbidden because it's the trademark of those who represent a threat to the magical community (understand: people who riot or strike or protest against the ruling socioeconomical class' politics)?

But there was none of that.

"Dark" magic in HP merely seems to be a weird concept that at best accidentally takes the form of an in-world obscurantism, at worst is just the trademark of someone who cannot imagine a "hunted, ostracized" community with a different culture and mindset than her own. Aggravating is the fact that she used "Dark magic" as a plot device to magically cast some people as good and others as never bad – again, probably reflecting her own questionable mentality.

The fact Rowlnig invented the notion of Dark Magic and had her world consider it seriously as an evil thing instead of being open-minded seems to be less telling of her wishes to show a wizard society that can be as prejudiced as the muggle one, and more of her own bizarre world where you must be evil if you are knowledgeable in or interested in certain "taboo" things (RIP neurodivergents).

Rowling glorifies the Trio and the Marauders for breaking rules. Yet when it comes to actually breaking expectations and norms, notably in the wizarding society -- like the use of another magical species as slaves, or the blatant anti-Muggle prejudice held by everyone including "good guys" (or anti-centaur while we're at it), or stupid anti-knowledge prejudice like "Dark magic is evil" -- there is none of that. At best, it's surface-level opposition that comes out as white savior syndrome. At worst, the protagonists make it their noble code to enforce those norms, and "sinful" characters (Snape, for one) are punished for not conforming. Too often, those sinful characters are punished by the "good guys" with the very thing that they apparently oppose so fervently.

Without ever adressing the fact that those characters were ("morally") allowed to do that because it was just, in the end, a matter of who gets the privilege to do that, and who does not.

There.

Do you have anything to say to develop on those ideas? I feel like I'm reaching my knowledge limit and I'd like to see if those ideas can be expanded.

[ramshackledtrickster]

oh geez, just read that anon i could go on about ubisoft being a bad company and against the very thesis of ac;; just with desmond’s abrupt death alone, the reason is because of their corporate abuse and creative disputes with patrice désilets (the creator of the franchise) to the point they unceremoniously fired him and cobbled together their own narrative direction to churn out sequels without his involvement—that’s why the new ac narrative is so much more different and weaker with such terrible choices, it’s disappointing but not surprising with how things are going now 😬

No yeah you’re right absolutely right

Case in point: Capitalism rly is the enemy of art and storytelling and creativity.,, with the way the later games are rushed out and how the workers behind the scenes are mistreated it really shows in how disjointed the series is as a whole

Lots of plot threads never get tied back and closure is rarely sought after or just rushed as a whole and it’s just. Disappointing. But not surprising. Corporations are a friend to no one and money is the bottom line.

But that’s what the fan base is for to pick up the pieces and make something better from it, damn the company and all.

[tamiisnthere]

A silly comic why William Miles was kicked out of the Brotherhood. 😆 Bayek has no tolerance for abusers.

(↓ Credits under Keep reading)

Programs: XNALara & Fire Alpaca

Assassin’s Creed © Ubisoft

Bayek’s Model © TSelman61 (DeviantArt)

AC1 Desmond's Model © o0Cristian0o (DeviantArt)

William's Model © Unknown, reuploaded by oOLeonValentineOo (DeviantArt)

Suitcase © Oo-FiL-oO (DeviantArt)

[caitlynnrosespn]

My opinion on different Just Dance Ships.

Oh God we're doing this ok

So I want to say I'm not against any non problematic ships. I'm not really!! I just... have a hard time with some of these or really enjoy others.

But at the end of the day, if your ship doesn't involve a minor dating an adult, is straight up incest, suggests abuse or is just wrong for any reason, then ship it. You have the freedom to do so, so I implore you.

Let's start with Wanderlust ships. A. Ladies and gentlemen that is a gay man. Yes, I do realize he's technically not "CANONICALLY GAY" but this is Ubisoft. They could have two men full on makeout and shit and still call them best friends. So read the room guys, he's gay. I struggle with Wandersara because of this. Yes, technically it makes sense. But also, it's just... no. I also kinda dislike it because it's kinda like... a man and a woman can't just be friends you know? Like I hate that in writing. Just because they're friends of an opposite sex doesn't mean they're dating. So, I get it of you don't ship Wanderrose but at least have the decency to ship him with another guy/lh

Look, I understand Sara is a canonical "Just Dance Character" but I also understand that she's human. She has a life in another world. I just don't think she could make it to the Danceverses enough to justify dating a different coach. ALTHOUGH. Developing human ocs for her to be dating could prove to be so much fun. I also say this because I feel like she's going to get a human husband in canon (they might do a vutscene at the end that has her (as in Shirley's) husband in it. I just feel bacld advertising for a ship when I have that feeling that's Sara already has a a human to date/marry.

Yeahhhhhh I know people ship Nightswan with other coaches and yup I struggle with it. I feel like Nighyswan is just such a toxic person that shipping her with other coaches is like... I don't know. Once again if they're all canonical consenting adults I won't ruin your fun I just won't be advertising for it either.

[blockgamepirate]

Other people already posted this but I wanted to copy the text as well (the website has the text also in French)

QSMP – SUMMARY OF THE SITUATION

Last week, we invited Quackity and other Quackity Studios executives to engage in negotiations with their workers. As far as we know, no contact has been attempted, either directly or via us. In fact, most of them saw all their communication media cut off without prior notice nor any further explanation.

A wide range of positions are illustrated in the testimonials we have received: egg actors, translators for various languages, community managers, artists, builders, developers, etc.

We have been made aware of several defamatory messages, some of which being public, towards people we defend, in order to sideline them and discredit criticism. Several staff members have been expelled from their positions in an attempt to cover up serious offences committed by the individuals they worked with. This is sadly usual: just like with Ubisoft or Quantic Dream, Quackity Studios silences those who speak up to protect its upper management.

The pattern is well-rounded:

Hiring « volunteer » workers. Some of them are promised a salary (without announcing any amount) following a one-week free « trial period », which is extended over months.

After this trial, a surprise: budget is restricted, meaning this salary will be no more than $200 or $300.

Of course, no written employment contract is provided. Even worse, workers are compelled to sign an abusive, badly-written NDA, which is to be their sole legal basis, so as to « keep the role-play surprise ».

This NDA is hijacked to deny workers the right to protest about their working conditions. Their personal social media accounts are watched, they are asked to take screenshots of their private messages (with threats to those who dare to resist), they are reminded about how « lucky » they are to work for Quackity, although for free, 70 hours a week, without any time off (no vacation, nor even weekends)…

To drain away any energy to stand up for their rights, burnouts are induced and planed: undersized « volunteer » teams, massive amounts of work to be delivered yesterday, then thrown away because no longer needed. When someone refuses this urgency, pressure to « just do an hour or two », to make them feel guilty.

Dismissal of those considered not sufficiently productive (on vacation, because of personal impediments, having technical problems, etc.).

When social media are involved and expose the truth, scapegoats are sought to, again, protect the perpetrators.

In the end, following the revelation of the case, all the French workers, regardless their contribution to it, have been fired in violation of all applicable legal procedures.

Four recurring aspects appear in the reports: disguised work, frenetic work rhythm, invasive surveillance of workers (including illegal intrusions into their privacy), and moral harassment.

We reiterate our call, to Quackity and other executives at Quackity Studios, to take action immediately. A full internal review, unanimously requested by the workers, is urgent. It must contribute to social dialogue, in order to achieve a fair and equitable outcome for all affected people (both in France and other countries), with appropriate (and retroactive) compensation.

If Quackity is unable to address the problems internally, we will sue the company to defend the workers.

[superayman]

Crazy Ass Moments in Rayman History part 1:

UbiSoft donated 20,000 dollars in a check on October 24th, 1999 for volunteer-based charity run “Prevent Child Abuse - California.” A Rayman mascot suit went to present UbiSoft’s donation.

According to IGN’s telling of the day, it was spent with, “one mile races around Civic Center Plaza, in downtown San Francisco. Children were…enjoying the races, contest giveaways, and festivities, which included food, live music, clowns, and face painters. Kids were also invited to The Rayman Pavilion, where they could try their crack at Rayman 2: The Great Escape.”

[sparrow-in-boots]

i can and will complain about the horrid treatment Desmond and Clay got in the games, but i certainly will NEVER forgive ubisoft for how dirty they did Daniel.

that man is brimming with potential. we had two comics showing how he was used as a tool by the templars, how all of his life was informed and affected by what they did to him as a child. how he was left on the side of the road without clothes or a name to him, bereft of support and answers to his hallucinations, which led him down a turbulent and traumatic life. how the one community and support he found, the same one that gave him a direction and goals and a sense of belonging was violently ripped away from him because in the end, even that was just a lie, another illusion. everything he worked for for years in the brotherhood, meant nothing, was nothing, because the templars caused him to burn that bridge and the moat and the castle all in one stab of a blade. and now, he has no choice but to throw it in with the people who ruined any and all chances he ever had of a normal or stable life. they are the ones with the animus and the drugs that he needs to continue to exist, much less function somewhat normally. he has no other choice but to surrender himself as a tool, and he's always desperate to prove himself useful because he knows that once he's not, he'll be discarded again, and that will be a fate worse than death for him. if the brotherhood doesn't get him, then the drugs and the violent outbursts caused by the hallucinations will.

he was - is - a perfect foil for Desmond, who has been treated as a pawn, by the assassins and the templars and the isu, he's just the right person to be at the right place at the right time, thanks to a sprawling line of causality that leads him solely to it. he was a tool before he was even born, the community he was born in treated him as such too and so he left. he condemned himself to an isolated and dangerous life to attempt to be a person and find self-actualization, and look how that turned out. sure he chose to stay with the brotherhood and help, but in the end was that really his choice or did the calculations just compute his willingness to it? did he ever have a choice at all or was it all just numbers on a tally of probability?

Daniel is the worst case scenario Desmond could have ended up as. A man used and abused to the point where he has no choice but to make his peace with the role that was decided for him. he's Desmond's shadow of the soul as it were. they are both just playing their roles and they both are more aware of it than most people could ever be. Desmond said it himself.

"It just keeps happening over and over." "What does?" "Everything..."

and to further expand on on the narrative foils, Daniel and Clay also are mirrors of each other. Both stepping stones on the grand scheme of things, ultimately disposable but never dismissable. But while Daniel became a victim of the Animus and his need for it to function, wanting to ditch it but unable to, Clay had no choice but to surrender himself to it in order to see his duty to the bitter end. Daniel can barely handle existing in the real world anymore, and Clay had to leave it to continue existing in the simulation. Neither ever wanted his, but they both needed to do it to make something, anything, of themselves and the pain that was inflicted upon them.

worst of all, the game seems aware of all that!! even setting the last mission's confrontation in the Animus chamber in Italy, the place and machine connecting the three men together. Desmond having to use the Animus as a barrier between himself and Daniel, the thing that doomed both Daniel and Clay being his one protection at the time... it was all setup so beautifully for a poignant meaningful scene between those two, maybe even a proper boss fight--!

but what do we get? an absurdly deus ex machina bleeding effect that turns Daniel into another chase assassination. No fighting back, no words, no discussion or debate. Not even a fucking confession cutscene. It's disgraceful, it's pathetic, and it's so, so offensive to your audience and the story you're writing.

[itbe-jess]

I just need to get this off my chest.

I feel like so many fans give CL Rayman a little too much credit. They’re always praising him, but I’ve never seen one person who is reasonably critical about him. (Except the one who aren’t really really fans) Yes, Rayman doing explicit adult activities, saying fuck, abusing drugs, and killing people is fun, but he’s technically not perfect. I’m tired of fans pretending like he is. I like the premise of his character, and this whole new approach is very interesting to me. But I’m sorry, the edgy Flanderization is just really annoying.

Yes, Rayman is supposed to be edgy. He has always been edgy. Rayman 3 being a big primary example of this. However, Rayman in Rayman 3 wasn’t just some mischievous edgy frat boy. He had more variety. Aside from having edge, he was also this laidback dude who loved to relax, had a wholesome childish spirit to him, and overall shows he cares for others around him.

That’s what CL Rayman is missing: Variety. Hell, I wouldn’t be a Rayman fan today if Sparks of Hope only portrayed Rayman as nothing but this salty millennial who can’t let go of the past. There’s not one scene with CL Rayman, outside of work, that doesn’t involve him in anything vulgar or offensive. I’m not gonna count any scenes where he’s in his TV Persona, because that’s technically not him being himself. That’s just him doing his job. Look, I love edgy characters, but not when they’re oversaturated with the one thing they’re most known for. Angel Dust couldn’t even compete with that level of edge. I’m not saying Rayman can’t be angry and depressed. As a matter of fact, he has every right to. His feelings are completely valid. But would it kill the writers to show him being funny or wholesome for one minute?

His least edgiest scene in the whole show has got to be his interview with Bullfrog. While it still presented an angsty atmosphere, and the vomiting moment was unnecessary, I’ll admit it was a breath of fresh air seeing him take a break from all that swearing and accept a juice box. My favorite part of that scene has got to be seeing a smile on his face. A real smile. You know, something tells me that Ubisoft doesn’t want Rayman to be happy in his series.

Rayman doesn’t feel like Rayman, either. Or even a character for that matter. In my opinion, he feels more like an early 2000s’ Newgrounds parody. Yes, I KNOW he’s supposed to be a whole different take on the character, but you know something? You CAN make an already existing character entirely different! It’s a really bold move to experiment more depth with that character. However, it’s also important to let them keep a tiny bit of their old, familiar charisma, so that they’re still recognizable to the fans. Familiarity is the key. Without that familiarity, that character might as well have a different name and appearance. CL Rayman doesn’t have Rayman’s charm, his humor, or even his good heart. Just his looks, and identity.

He does get struck by guilt after learning the truth about Eden, and he sacrifices his entire career just to fix his own mistakes. However, those don’t count as being kind. He’s killing fascists out of good intention, but in the end, it’s just violence. Not kindness. It’s really hard to see Ramon as the type of guy who would give me a hug when all I’ve seen him act is angry, depressed, and violent, not to mention he has snorted coke and ate sushi off of prostitutes in the comfort of his million dollar penthouse. If they want me to believe he truly is a sweet guy, THEN I WANNA FUCKING SEE IT! Have him, ya know, interact with kids! Comfort Dolph on his loss! Maybe even form a dorky, yet wholesome friendship with Bullfrog! There are many ways to have him express kindness, and not just through violence!

I’d also like to add that Rayman’s heel turn moment just felt kinda forced. We don’t even know how he got access to firearms. In the last episode, he was so whiny and weak. Then all of a sudden, he’s strong? C’mon, the dude has been loyal to Eden for years. They could’ve at least shown him reflecting on the impact of his actions first, and then figure out a way to resolve the problem at stake. I would have rather the show end like that so that the writers could give themselves time to build up a climatic story for season 2, not just get right to the point. Six episodes or not, it’s a poor writing direction.

I don’t care what anyone says: A 100% serious role does not work for Rayman. Don’t get me wrong; You can take Rayman seriously, but we’re also supposed to laugh at him, and with him. He’s not Spider-Man (a character that blends realism with lighthearted comedy), he’s a freaking Looney Tune! Even a game as dark and serious as Rayman 2 had moments to make us giggle. Humor plays an important role in Rayman’s character. Michel Ancel also intended humor to be one of his most defining traits. Just by looking at him, you know he’s someone you can’t take seriously! A Rayman that isn’t funny makes as much sense as having Crash Bandicoot talk.

I beg the writers to PLEASE flesh out Rayman’s character more in season 2! He can still swear, kill, snort coke, I don’t care, but at least bring out his sweeter side! Maybe make him a little goofy, too! For Polakus’s sake, make Rayman do something “Rayman-like” for once!

[teecupangel]

Hey there!

I don't know if you take requests for character analyses (if you don't just ignore this), but I would really like to see your take on Desmond Miles since, for some reason, I can't really seem to wrap my head around him, which has resulted in me finding him almost boring, and I would like to remedy that.

I'm particularly interested in what you believe to be to be his biggest flaws and where they come from, since that's what usually compels me the most about a character, and also what I have trouble with finding in Desmond.

I’m fine with any analysis requests that get sent my way :)

Although, I do wonder if I’m the right person to analyze Desmond since character analysis is meant to be as nonbias as possible but I’m me and y’all know how much I love Desmond at this point. XD

I will do my best though but it is my duty to remind you that this analysis is written by someone who loves Desmond so, yeah, some of that love will bleed thru in this analysis.

Also, as this would get pretty long if I do a complete character analysis, I’ll focus on what compelled me to Desmond which, I believe, is connected to your question about what his flaws are and where they come from.

What compelled me to Desmond:

Nolan North’s Voice

He’s voiced by Nolan North and I’ve been in love with Nolan North’s voice since I played Spec Ops the Line. Haha, no, that’s half a joke and my obligatory “Nolan North fangirling” out of the way. Also, no joke, Nolan North was able to give Desmond a compelling voice that helped mold his character in my eyes and ears. I never once heard Desmond speak and thought "oh, that's Nathan Drake" which is funny since Nolan North uses similar voices for the two of them. With what he's given, Nolan North was able to make Desmond unique from his other characters, making him a charming and adorable dumbass with more depth than he usually shows.

Endless Potential

This was what compelled me to him because his part in the series felt like it was building for something more. If we were to believe what Nolan North said in this video (around the 33~34 minute mark), Desmond was meant to have a bigger part in the story. The ultimate Assassin with the ability to time travel, most probably to help change the past and tragedy of his ancestors and to usher in a brighter future for the Brotherhood and mankind. The one who will finally end the endless war between the Assassins and the Templars.

But then Ubisoft screwed that up and wasted Desmond’s potential.

But from their actions were born endless potential. For as long as there are fans who create new stories with Desmond in them, Desmond lives up to that endless potential. By destroying Desmond’s potential, Ubisoft unintentionally created a character with endless potential given to him by those who create stories where he is resurrected or never died in the first place.

And that endless potential is what brings new ideas and scenarios for our dear poor Desmond to get involved with. XD

Desmond and His Ancestors

Kenway-Patented Daddy Issues

So let’s start with Ratonhnhaké:ton because there are some people who say that Desmond and Ratonhnhaké:ton are quite similar to one another but, let’s be honest, most of those comparisons stem from their similar ‘tense’ relationship with their father. Desmond and Ratonhnhaké:ton mirror each other because of that relationship and they showed two contrasting ‘endings’:

Ratonhnhaké:ton had wanted to build a bridge between himself and his father but ended up killing Haytham because of their differences and their stubbornness to yield to the other’s wishes and demands.

On the other hand, Desmond let go of whatever animosity he felt for his father and made up with him in the end even though there have been hints of how deeply Bill mistreated his son (either thru neglect or actual abuse is up to interpretation) that should have been given more time to talk about than... two-ish voice messages.

This is more my opinion but Desmond forgiving his father and trying to make amends is because he wished to grant Ratonhnhaké:ton’s wish in some form. Perhaps even his Bleed of Ratonhnhaké:ton is the reason why he felt the desire to make amends because he’s seeing a lot of Haytham Kenway in Bill. In his Bleed-’corrupted’ mind, this could be counted as Ratonhnhaké:ton getting his wish.

The Legend Everyone Wants Him To Become

Lucy said it herself, they’re using the Bleeding Effect to jumpstart and cheat their way into making Desmond an Assassin. But is that really their end goal? Sure, Lucy had the ulterior motive of the Templars wanting to get the POE that had been under Ezio’s care but the Assassins themselves want Desmond to become an Assassin as quickly as possible.

We can even make an argument that they want Desmond to not be an Assassin like Ezio Auditore but to be Ezio Auditore.

Because Ezio Auditore was seen as a success story by the Assassins. They didn’t know how he had almost been so close to giving up the Creed during his later years, they didn’t know how he left the Brotherhood because he had enough…

They remember Ezio Auditore as this great man, this legend.

And the Bleeding Effect gave them the tool to try and recreate this legend in Desmond Miles.

Also, the way Lucy, Shaun, and Rebecca supported Desmond is similar to how Mario and the members of the Italian Brotherhood in AC2 supported Ezio.

In some ways, they were using Desmond/Ezio to get what they want. Desmond and Ezio are the ones risking their lives the most (either in the field where anything and everyone can kill him with Ezio or in a high-tech device that could destroy his mind with Desmond) while their allies kept information from them “until the time is right” (mostly Bill and, by extension, Lucy) and supported them from the shadows instead.

The Distorted Mirror

For me, Desmond is actually more of Altaïr’s foil and a distorted mirror image of Altaïr because:

Both of their mothers are quite the blank slate with Maud only known as a Christian member of the Levantine Brotherhood but never confirmed to be an actual Assassin while Desmond’s mother has never been officially called an Assassin, only a member of the Brotherhood like Maud.

Both were born and raised in Assassin ‘strongholds’, isolated from the rest of the world. How similar their upbringing was is open for interpretation but, considering how Desmond never talked about any specific children from the Farm and didn’t talk about his life as a bartender or any of his coworkers and the only person that treats Altaïr like an old friend was an informant in Damascus (if we do not count Rauf who looks like he’s friendly with everyone and Kadar who is more on the side of hero-worship for Altaïr than being a friend of equal grounds), we can safely assume they were both lonely (especially after Abbas and Altaïr’s friendship went to hell).

Both of them were trained to be Assassins at an early age but where Altaïr thrived and became one of the best Assassins in the Levantine Brotherhood (and, later on, in history), Desmond saw himself as a failure.

Speaking of which, they both have father figures who trained them to be Assassins but where Al Mualim succeeded in creating a valuable weapon, Bill failed.

Both of them, at some point in their lives, thought about running away. Altaïr had been ready to leave Levant with Adha but stayed instead after her death. Desmond, on the other hand, actually ran away and created a new life out of the reach of the Brotherhood.

Altaïr is known for saying “How can I regret the only life I have ever known?” which echoes Desmond’s regrets of running away from his Assassin lineage.

Desmond had talked about how he wished people had told him things, had explained things to him, and given him information that would have made him understand that the Assassins and Templars were real. He even tells Shaun that he would have loved to have been a know-it-all in the Desmond_01.WAV in AC Valhalla. Altaïr is known to hoard knowledge (his library) and is a scholar as well. They both desired knowledge but where Altaïr sought and hoarded it, Desmond simply… wished for it.

There are other comparisons of how similar they are but distorted in some way to make them unique from one another (like how their canon love interest (sorta in Desmond’s case) died because of them in some form or another) but those are some of the major ones in my opinion.

So, you might be wondering, why did I focus so much on Desmond’s ancestors when this is meant to be a character analysis of Desmond himself?

Because that is one of his flaws.

Desmond has and will always be compared to his ancestors, both in universe and in meta. One can only imagine how Desmond felt about being compared to his ancestors.

Well...

We can actually guess how he felt about that because...

Another one of his flaws is how he saw himself as a failure and his feeling of being never enough, of being a failure stems from, you guessed it, William Fucking Miles:

I—I had failed you, and you KNEW it. But you said nothing. I stayed mad. For weeks. I thought you were...you were patronizing me. I thought maybe you decided right there that I was never going to be the man you wanted me to be... (Noob’s Personal Files: "Subject Zero" - audio file 3)

The rest of the audio file talked about how Desmond had misunderstood Bill’s actions but what kind of upbringing would he have to have had that his first thought when he was praised was that it was a lie? Instead of immediately believing the praises given to him by his own father, he assumed that he had failed and his father had given up on him?

Desmond couldn’t even see his own accomplishment:

Desmond: I wanted out. I wanted my own life. To live my own way. Sixteen years old. And where was I going? No idea. Just away. That's it. That was the plan. Not much of one. They never guessed what I was doing, because I didn't know what I was doing. I just walked right out. Someone realized I was gone. They shouted. I started running.

William: Desmond! Desmond!

Desmond: I just ran and ran and ran. All that training was finally worth something. God, it was so dark when I left. And the forest... endless. I didn't dare take the roads.

Mother: Desmond, where are you?

Desmond: Mother, calling out. Begging me to stay. But I wouldn't. I followed the hills down. Down until I hit a stream. I followed that to a river, and from the river to an old access road. I walked for hours that day, the summer sun keeping me warm well into the evening. Found a clearing after dark. Fell asleep beneath the stars. Never had a quieter night. Not before or since. Walking, too scared to hitch a ride. What the hell was I doing? Lost in the badlands for a day. Felt like a week. Endless ocean of wrinkled earth. Can't believe a place could look so dead. (AC Revelations Escape)

A secured location run and protected by adult Assassins couldn’t catch a 16 year old kid? Even if it’s just his parents who went after him, two adults with more experience couldn’t catch him? This only shows that Desmond had the skills. A sixteen years old who had NEVER left the Farm further than what his training and his parents had allowed was able to evade those who were training him his entire life.

Yet, he still thought that he had been a failure. That memory of Bill praising him for doing a good job and him believing that Bill had given up on him stayed with him and made him believe he was a failure for a very long time.

And this was a man who stayed out of the whole Assassin and Templar business for nine years until he grew complacent and tried to treat himself with a motorcycle license (which might show how bored he was with his life as a bartender and wanted some excitement in his life… like a really fast vehicle)

Bill described Desmond as:

This... boy had no ambition. No direction. No plans for the future. What he DID have was a heritage. One he chose to deny. (AC3 Intro)

But then you get to Desmond’s audio files in AC Valhalla where he talked to Shaun about what the Creed means and he says this:

Anyway, my dad has mellowed over the years. But he was strict when we lived on the Farm. He ran a tight ship. I never got the impression that I was free to choose my path forward. Our creed, our tenets, they were drilled into my head. By the time I was a teenager, I was following these rules out of a sense of duty. This was... just what we did. (Layla Hassan’s Personal Files Desmond_01.WAV)

Just like Altaïr, the life of an Assassin was the only life Desmond had and he felt like he never had a choice. He was envious of Shaun who decided to become an Assassin out of his own free will.

But running away?

Denying his lineage?

That was the very first ‘choice’ he ever made for himself.

And this brings us to what Desmond desired most of all:

His “I wanted my own life.” in AC Revelation’s Escape is another excuse he tells himself. Because what he truly wanted was:

A Place to Belong.

After nine years of being away, my old bitterness was back. I was tired again. I didn't want to admit that moving forward might mean taking a step back. But the shine of the city had faded. The freedom I felt was hollow without old friends, without family. (AC Revelations Regret)

But then Desmond started saying these lines:

And suddenly, I wanted it all back. All that training, all that time. But I couldn't. Those days. They were gone. (AC Revelations Regret)

Not until you guys found me. Yeah. It wasn't until I met you and Becs and Lucy that I knew... I knew I wanted to be an Assassin. (Layla Hassan’s Personal Files Desmond_01.WAV)

I know my easiest days are behind me. But I don't want them back. Not now. My name is Desmond Miles... and I am an Assassin. I AM an Assassin. (AC Revelations Regret)

But then compare that to how Desmond was in AC1:

Lucy: Why'd you run away?

Desmond: I could never leave the compound. You have any idea what it's like being trapped in a place, knowing there is a whole world out there I'd never get to see?

Lucy: Don't you miss your parents?

Desmond: No. Far as I'm concerned, they weren't my parents. They were my wardens and I was their prisoner.

Lucy: It sounds like they only wanted to protect you.

Desmond: With all that's happened... I don't know. I guess they were right. (AC1, after the first memory block)

What changed?

Is it because Desmond knew what it was like to be part of a team? Of what it’s like to be an Assassin?

Yes but it’s a little bit more complicated than that.

Desmond felt like he belonged with the Assassins but he made one big mistake: he thought he meant the Assassins as they were are right now.

But what he truly desired, the place that he believed he could belong was the Brotherhood of olds.

The Levantine Brotherhood under Altaïr as the mentor.

The Italian Brotherhood under Ezio as the mentor.

Those were the 'memories' he had of what it meant to be part of a Brotherhood.

Then he started reliving Ratonhnhaké:ton’s life (one who did not have a Brotherhood, instead a village that left him behind and an old man too jaded to truly guide him without letting his past and guilt drive a wedge between them) and those messages he left for Bill? The acceptance? The forgiveness?

They were created after experiencing the pain and loneliness that Ratonhnhaké:ton went thru. It was created after he felt the sorrow of having a father that will never accept him for who he was.

They were left by a man who felt the regrets of someone close to him, could feel himself be him at times, and wished for another ending.

A… happier one.

Desmond’s line of

My name is Desmond Miles... and I am an Assassin. I AM an Assassin.

Becomes bittersweet because, yes, he had accepted who he was meant to be from the start but, thanks to the Bleeding Effect, we never got to know if the kind of Assassin he was ever meant to be was one that was truly Desmond Miles or…

Someone trying to live up to the memories of his ancestors.

[overlooked-gems]

A Look At Stuff You Probably Never Heard Of: Rayman: The Animated Series

Well, with the Rayman DLC being released for Mario + Rabbids: Sparks of Hope, I feel it's rather appropriate to talk about Rayman's first foray into other media outside of video games. In fact, we'll be taking a look at his first TV show. Today, we'll be taking a look at... Rayman: The Animated Series!

Rayman: The Animated seres was a very short-lived TV series created by Ubisoft in 1999, following the success of Rayman 2, the most recent game at the time. 26 episodes were planned to release sometime in Autumn of 2000, but the series was cancelled after only 4 episodes were produced and the 5th being near compleition. With the episodes already made, they aired in France, Germany and the Netherlands from December 20th, 1999 to January 10th of the following year.

Rigatoni and his lackey, Admiral Razorbeard run a freak show; a circus comprised of weird, bizarre, and unflattering characters made to perform for the amusement of attendants while being abused and mistreated.

Within their group of performers are Lac-Man, a blue rabbit-like creature who's dim but very strong (and is the star of Rigatoni's freak show; Betina, who performs as an acrobat; Cookie, a paranoid, whiny, and dramatic mole with hypochondria (thinking he's sick or ill) but is a really good handyman and cook; Flips, a little fairy who can only speak in squeaks, but the others can understand her; and Rayman himself, the newest member of the troupe, who instantly decides to escape.

After the group escapes, Rigatoni enlists the help of Inspector Grub to track them down and return them to him. As such, the episodes are mostly minor "adventures" while trying to evade Grubs, but they also secretly live in a flat just above his house, where he lives with his wife.

Obviously, when the show was made, CGI was the big new thing, releasing around the same time as the likes of Donkey Kong Country (1997-2000), ReBoot (1994-2001), and Beast Wars: Transformers (1996-1999). So as a result, the CGI hasn't aged all that well. The TV show is also a massive departure from the games, with the only connection being that it has Rayman.

And here comes the Final Recommendation Never Let Go Of It||Get It||Hold Onto It||Try It||Consider It||Stay Away From It

The series is honestly, not that good. Granted, it's not awful or even horrible. If anything, it has its moments, but they're really nothing impressive. As I stated before, the biggest issue the show has is that it has practically nothing to do with Rayman outside of having the titular character, as well as Razorbeard, who was just downgraded to a dim-witted lackey. Although, Betina and Lac-Mac may also serve as stand-ins for Betilla and Globox, respectively, due to their similar color schemes.

Also, one of the things this series is known for is that it has Billy West voicing Rayman. There's even a meme of how Rayman says "car".

At the end of the day, this show isn't all that special. But if you want to watch it, it's there. In fact, here's a video showing the entire series in one video.

And with that, I'll see you all next month!

[beardedmrbean]

Gah being a ac fan under Ubisoft is like being in a abusive relationship. The sexist and predatory executives, though I have heard any breast milk thievery yet

But seriously executives said why female assassins are barely used in the main games is because “Women don’t sell well”

We can point to Metroid and tomb raider, but also the fact Ubisoft have a cult classic beyond good and evil that have a female protagonist.

I get this sexist bs from Hollywood, but what in the nine hells with the gaming industry?

Not mentioned I pointed out the whole ac Japan game, current, very likely to be 70 bucks

Oh and there also doing a triple A Star Wars game

Reveal trailer: https://youtu.be/ymcpwq1ltQc?si=gG0o5ohLqXcx3ic4

Gameplay trailer if you have time: https://youtu.be/c7K2TA0bBpY?si=qEVVnnaAOCp0KXCc

But gaming subscription, now I have gamepass and it’s more or less Netflix of gaming. But I can digitally buy those games if I like it so much or physically get it if I can.

But fit Ubisoft, okay they got a Ubisoft plus thing (I don’t use it for obvious reasons) but but hardly any publisher got such a library, not to mention that gamers are the pickiest of consumers so the idea you can’t own a game isn’t going to work especially the shitshow WB is causing.

Sorry for the essay

I think the guy from ubisoft that said all that is getting the same treatment as the aussie guy that said 'workers need to shut up and do their jobs so other people could make more money/, something like that at least.

Only way they could manage that is if they did like WoW did at first with the game disc being like 5 bucks because you couldn't play it without a subscription, but there's worlds of difference between a mmorpg and AC I would think.

Also Star Wars game looks rad, gonna have to be on the lookout for the cinematics online after it comes out.