Ganondork
goo
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2010
Hey everyone. A recent news post on Assassin's Creed Dungeon seemed like a perfectly good topic to make a post over here. For any of you who want more up-to-date news on Assassin's Creed, be sure to check out Assassin's Creed Dungeon! Without further adieu, let's jump right in.
The people over at nerdreactor recently published an article concerning a topic that we, over here at Assassin’s Creed Dungeon covered briefly; scalping. It seems that to many people, this aspect has been controversial and has been taken into great consideration on whether or not it should be implemented. Perhaps there’s reason why this feature was removed back in March.
Among the online communities, there has been a lot of speculation concerning this specific feature. While some people – who were clearly for scalping – felt it would add a brutal aspect to the game, others felt that historical inaccuracies may be in place here, depending on Connor’s race. Others feel that this may reinforce a hurtful stereotype.
Thus far, development director, Tommy Francois has cited the removal of scalping as historic inaccuracy. Despite this, there has still been considerable debate on the validity of this statement. At this point, almost everyone knows Connor “Ratonhnhaké:ton” Kenway is a half-British, half-Native, but the exact Native background is still in question.
Most sources cite Connor as a Mohawk, who lived in a Mohawk Village, until Templars attacked it, giving him a reason to lash out and become an Assassin like many people before him. On the other hand, other sources say that Connor is of a Mohave background. So what exactly is Connor, and what is the difference in historical accuracy?
In order to make a proper decision on whether there should be scalping or not, one must informed on this topic. One of the most important things is to know which tribes actually practiced scalping. This is the only way to successfully achieve historical accuracy. Alongside this, one must also consider the fact that, during this time, there were English and French bounties for the scalps of Native men, women, and children. These scalping bounties prove that not only the Natives did it; the colonists did as well. Records of scalping bounties go as late as 1776. This is already thirty years into Connor’s life, so it is possible that we may see scalping in Assassin’s Creed III. However, the question remains: should Connor partake in any scalping?
And here is where we hit yet another roadblock; which tribe did Connor belong to? It’s difficult to say for sure – neither tribes had a written language at the time. However, there is one piece of evidence that may prove beneficial to this debate. There is very few documentation of Mohave-British relations until 1859 when they surrendered land instead of risking the extermination of their people. The Mohawks, on the other hand, have a history with the Colonists. Part of the Iroquois Confederacy – a league of tribes that had an alliance with the British – the Mohawk had plenty of contact with the British. The Mohawk were one of the four tribes – out of six – that stuck with the British during the Revolution. With this kept in mind, it’s probable that Connor is Mohawk, and not Mohave.
With this kept in mind, one must figure out whether or not the Mohawks partook in scalping. There’s only one known case of scalping – this was the scalping of a Pequot ambassador. This of course led to the Pequot war, a four-year conflict that ended with the annihilation of the Pequot. With all of this kept in mind, it’s difficult to say if the Mohawks actually scalped during the time of the Revolution – yet another issue with the Mohawks lacking a written language. This may actually be a smart move on Ubisoft Montreal’s side; it’s best to avoid this than to take a leap of faith into political correctness.
With this out of the way, we need to take down the next hurdle; the claims of racism. This shouldn’t be a sufficient reason to remove the scalping feature; people have been claiming the game racist since we haven’t seen enough killing of Colonists – only the British. Despite this, Ubisoft would be wise to give critics as little ammunition as they can. If this was the reason, then perhaps it was for the best.
And then there’s the final issue that requires some form of discussion; the brutality of scalping. Assassin’s Creed is a series well-known for gory, and over-the-top assassinations, but does it truly have to be taken a step further? Not many Assassin’s Creed fans play the game for the gore – there are plenty of other forms of media to saturate that desire. Not to mention Connor’s myriad of weapons – from the tomahawk to the bow – should satisfy any fan’s blood lust.
Once again, political correctness may be an enormous issue. Plenty of critics will find things to insult Assassin’s Creed III with, but Native Americans really don’t need Fox Network shoving cameras in their face, asking them if they’re offended by the scalping feature in this upcoming game release.
Whether or not Ubisoft pulled the plug on this feature for political reasons or historical accuracy, it may have been a good idea on their part. Controversy from a simple video game feature should be avoided at all costs – there’s enough of that in other forms of media.
So what are your thoughts? Should scalping have been removed? What was their aims for removing it in the first place?
The people over at nerdreactor recently published an article concerning a topic that we, over here at Assassin’s Creed Dungeon covered briefly; scalping. It seems that to many people, this aspect has been controversial and has been taken into great consideration on whether or not it should be implemented. Perhaps there’s reason why this feature was removed back in March.
Among the online communities, there has been a lot of speculation concerning this specific feature. While some people – who were clearly for scalping – felt it would add a brutal aspect to the game, others felt that historical inaccuracies may be in place here, depending on Connor’s race. Others feel that this may reinforce a hurtful stereotype.
Thus far, development director, Tommy Francois has cited the removal of scalping as historic inaccuracy. Despite this, there has still been considerable debate on the validity of this statement. At this point, almost everyone knows Connor “Ratonhnhaké:ton” Kenway is a half-British, half-Native, but the exact Native background is still in question.
Most sources cite Connor as a Mohawk, who lived in a Mohawk Village, until Templars attacked it, giving him a reason to lash out and become an Assassin like many people before him. On the other hand, other sources say that Connor is of a Mohave background. So what exactly is Connor, and what is the difference in historical accuracy?
In order to make a proper decision on whether there should be scalping or not, one must informed on this topic. One of the most important things is to know which tribes actually practiced scalping. This is the only way to successfully achieve historical accuracy. Alongside this, one must also consider the fact that, during this time, there were English and French bounties for the scalps of Native men, women, and children. These scalping bounties prove that not only the Natives did it; the colonists did as well. Records of scalping bounties go as late as 1776. This is already thirty years into Connor’s life, so it is possible that we may see scalping in Assassin’s Creed III. However, the question remains: should Connor partake in any scalping?
And here is where we hit yet another roadblock; which tribe did Connor belong to? It’s difficult to say for sure – neither tribes had a written language at the time. However, there is one piece of evidence that may prove beneficial to this debate. There is very few documentation of Mohave-British relations until 1859 when they surrendered land instead of risking the extermination of their people. The Mohawks, on the other hand, have a history with the Colonists. Part of the Iroquois Confederacy – a league of tribes that had an alliance with the British – the Mohawk had plenty of contact with the British. The Mohawk were one of the four tribes – out of six – that stuck with the British during the Revolution. With this kept in mind, it’s probable that Connor is Mohawk, and not Mohave.
With this kept in mind, one must figure out whether or not the Mohawks partook in scalping. There’s only one known case of scalping – this was the scalping of a Pequot ambassador. This of course led to the Pequot war, a four-year conflict that ended with the annihilation of the Pequot. With all of this kept in mind, it’s difficult to say if the Mohawks actually scalped during the time of the Revolution – yet another issue with the Mohawks lacking a written language. This may actually be a smart move on Ubisoft Montreal’s side; it’s best to avoid this than to take a leap of faith into political correctness.
With this out of the way, we need to take down the next hurdle; the claims of racism. This shouldn’t be a sufficient reason to remove the scalping feature; people have been claiming the game racist since we haven’t seen enough killing of Colonists – only the British. Despite this, Ubisoft would be wise to give critics as little ammunition as they can. If this was the reason, then perhaps it was for the best.
And then there’s the final issue that requires some form of discussion; the brutality of scalping. Assassin’s Creed is a series well-known for gory, and over-the-top assassinations, but does it truly have to be taken a step further? Not many Assassin’s Creed fans play the game for the gore – there are plenty of other forms of media to saturate that desire. Not to mention Connor’s myriad of weapons – from the tomahawk to the bow – should satisfy any fan’s blood lust.
Once again, political correctness may be an enormous issue. Plenty of critics will find things to insult Assassin’s Creed III with, but Native Americans really don’t need Fox Network shoving cameras in their face, asking them if they’re offended by the scalping feature in this upcoming game release.
Whether or not Ubisoft pulled the plug on this feature for political reasons or historical accuracy, it may have been a good idea on their part. Controversy from a simple video game feature should be avoided at all costs – there’s enough of that in other forms of media.
So what are your thoughts? Should scalping have been removed? What was their aims for removing it in the first place?
