So are Brits all butthurt over this game?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Assassin's Creed III
  3. So are Brits all butthurt over this game?

User Info: pennydemon

5 years ago#161
I can see why they might, but as an American I thought this game had a decidedly anti-American slant to accompany its anti-British slant.
I'm afraid, Dave.

User Info: Riku___

5 years ago#162
lololol butthurt Brits.
It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge.

User Info: steepcircle

5 years ago#163
deadpool223 posted...
ArthasReborn posted...
Judging from that other topic, I feel like Americans are the ones that are hurt by the portrayal of events and people in this game.

americans are hurt by everything.

Haha. there may be some truth to this after all. While playing the game, during the moments that George Washington was betrayed as a failure of a general I, as an American was actually offended, because I PERSONALLY hold G.W in high esteem. It actually prompted me to learn more about him and found out that he truly did have many military failures as the continental general.

Honestly at some points in the game I truly had to remind myself that this is actually a game, and not intended to be portrayed as TRUE to history. In the end though I enjoyed the story, I just had to remind myself that it was indeed a story in a video game.
Conrad Verner: "My wife was really supportive. She even paid for my shuttle fare off-world."
Matriarch Aethyta: *facepalm*

User Info: fullframework

5 years ago#164
My guess is, they're busy drinking cups of tea and eating bangers and mash...because they're British.

User Info: ArthasReborn

5 years ago#165
From: fullframework | #164
My guess is, they're busy drinking cups of tea and eating bangers and mash...because they're British.

Bangers. In the mouth.

User Info: jivedj

5 years ago#166
bloodgod92 posted...
Logicmonger posted...
British. Nearly as insignificant as Canadians, but easier to laugh at.

So insignificant we are the reason America exists... So insignificant we had the largest empire ever by landmass... yes, seems legit to me...

My country is better than yours, blah blah. Get over yourselves, seriously.

User Info: DrunkenPeasant

5 years ago#167
Nope, I'm just glad they're in the game, not played a game with the British empire in it for a long time. Plus, I like to think I balanced it out with all the continental soldiers that I slaughtered during the game. Don't know about my other fellow Brits, but having my country as the antagonists doesn't bother me in the slightest, it's not like the game is an a**-kissing pro-american feature either so I was pleasantly suprised by the lack of bias in favour of the "good guys."
"I used to rescue presidents, then I took an arrow in the knee...and still rescued the president." -Snake Plissken

User Info: slasherzeta

5 years ago#168
Why the hell would the Brits care? They didn't lose the war in any conventional sense. They beat the Americans from pillar to post in almost every major battle, fought it poorly, and hardly cared about the american colonies any longer, finding them more trouble than they were worth and gave up and went back home to focus on Europe and the Indies.

In hindsight they might have regretted the poor handling, but at the time, they couldn't have cared less about losing the war. They didn't care about losing the colonies in any real way.
R.I.P. Random Centaur

User Info: espraile

5 years ago#169
First of all - it's jsut a game!

I'm from the UK, and I was never taught any American history at school. Before this game I had very vague knowledge of the American Revolution. Once I heard that it was the setting for ACIII I read up about it on Wikipedia. Whilst playing the game, I felt that that both sides were portrayed in an equally bad light.

But the thing to remeber is that this game is a story based in history. They are putting their own angle and spin on it to tell a good story. If you want to make opinions base it on facts, not a video game. Not that I'm claiming to know much about it I just read the wikipedia entry!

I think most British people know very little about the details of the American Revolution so won't be offended by the game. My main complaint is that the setting wasnt very good for an Assasins creed game. Previously some of the best things about the games have been the cities themselves. Rome is my favourite (everybody knows the famous landmarks there), and Venice, Constantinople(Istanbul) and Jerusalum are famous historical places that eveerybody in the word would recognise from the architecture. Boston and New York only had famous building erected long after the setting for this game. There were very few places in the game I knew anything about.

Still enjoyed the game though, the story was good.
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so.

User Info: Madelle

5 years ago#170
LaManoNeraII posted...
Hence my original quote, "They fought for something, against overwhelming superiority, for a concept of liberty that hadn't existed on our planet in 2,000 years."

Our founding fathers made it happen. True, they had help- but what did the French have to lose? What did any of the Italian states have to lose, for that matter? They were all ruled by monarchies, bought and sold like property. They weren't truly united until Garibaldi did it. Who then surrendered the power he accumulated for the greater good of his people. Sound familiar?

The American colonists had everything to lose in their fight against the Crown. This wasn't just a group of philosophizers. They fought for their very survival, for the creation of the biggest democracy since Greece, and fought for the future we Americans take for granted today. And this honestly surprises you that we consider them heroes?

But that comment is still factually wrong, because the Corsican republic HAD actually existed! If you want to make it accurate, it should be "They fought for something, against overwhelming superiority, for a concept of liberty that hadn't endured on our planet in 2,000 years"

Many, many people have fought for their liberty and freedom throughout history. To state that this idea is somehow inherently American is an outright lie. Certainly, the US constitution was unique. It was also less democratic than the Corsican constitution, which remains the very first of its kind. Certainly, what the founding fathers achieved was something quite special. However, they were not breaking new ground. They were inspired by the men who had gone before.

Unfortunately for the Corsican Republic they were situated far too close to France and French interests. When Corsica rebelled and proclaimed independence Genoa sold it off to France. Paoli led a hopeless guerilla resistance, which was doomed to fail due to the small size and geography of the island. They too fought for their very survival against overwhelming odds but they lost. Paoli went off into exile. His efforts would later inspire "The Sons of Liberty". Several places in the US have since been named after him.

And calling America the "biggest democracy since Greece" is a further modification of the truth. In practice, there were several undemocratic aspects to the constitution that limited suffrage.The likes of Greek democracy has not been seen in large scale since Greece. Between 1720 and circa 1760, the Swedish government functioned about the same in practical democracy as the early American one.
  1. Boards
  2. Assassin's Creed III
  3. So are Brits all butthurt over this game?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived