So I see a lot of Odyssey hate from a lot of people. Can I just ask (and no I’m not looking for arguments) why nobody seems to hate on the biggest retcon in the entire franchise that practically wipes out everything that the 9 games before it told us about the Assassins and Templars true origins?
Some “Legendary Assassins” that we ‘meet’ in AC 2 are now known as freedom fighters or proto-assassins even though they are buried in sarcophagi that are adorned with Assassins insignia and sashes and are referred to as Assassins. Iltani even has the Assassins insignia on her belt and she was active in the 4th century, 250ish years before Bayek apparently created the insignia with his bird skull in the sand. Darius was also referred to as a Legendary Assassin who killed xerxes in 465BCE, that’s over 400 years before Bayek!
There is even an Assassins Creed timeline released in 2016 that states “The First Assassins - 75,100BCE” right at the top.
There is a tweet where Darby even says that there are a lot of “puzzling contradictions” created by Origins but that this is a starting point for the “AC newbies”
My take on this is that Ubisoft saw how much attention the new RPG marketed AC game was getting and how many new fans it pulled in so they thought “Oh... well these new fans aren’t going to go back and play all the previous games in order to understand the lore so we will just hit reset with Origins”
But why aren’t more people (mainly older fans) annoyed by this? I personally think this deserves more scrutiny than Odyssey does.