coolbeans said:
I think it's less defending Ubisoft and more shitting on the... "anti-woke silo," if you will. It's also had this really odd development outside of the original controversy: -Accredited Japanese historians are putting more time into the Yasuke claims. -A guy (or the guy) who drummed this up in his book took some convenient leaps to reach that conclusion. -Wikipedia locking down Yasuke's page after re-editing it to say he became a true Samurai, instead of simply leaving it as a contested aspect of his life. Literally editorializing history in the hopes of not giving the wrong people ammunition. We truly live in the most cringe timeline. |
What do you mean 'outside of the original controversy'. There's no way to disconnect the original point from all these developments, because the whole controversy literally started with them shoehorning this lazily researched DEI cliche into the game, then literally doubling-down by going on record saying "this will be our most historically accurate Assassin's Creed to date.", only to later turn around and directly contradict themselves after their 'source' got proven to be a complete liar.
You say you don't want to give ammunition to the "anti-woke silo", but bullshit Corporate agenda like this are the literal reason they exist. By defending or ignoring the blatant dishonesty, you're defending Ubisoft as well as all the other cheap and lazy corporate slave factories.
