#codename red

You know the expression, “The opposite of love isn’t hate but indifference?” The point of it is to demonstrate that lack of care is the greatest sign of love’s absence. But turn it on its side slightly, and what it’s also telling you is that love and hate can exist in the same space. I have seen no surer proof of this idiom’s truth than my own feelings towards Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed series. I love it . . . oh, but how I hate it, too.

For those of you just joining us, I am a fan of the series, but I am also very critical of it. I have loved this series for almost half of my life, but its evolution and overarching story is messy at best and insultingly incoherent at worst. I accept and embrace the series as it is, while also despising it for its unrealized potential.

With that being said, and since I’ve mentioned unrealized potential, let’s talk about the future of Assassin’s Creed -- specifically, the upcoming game currently codenamed “Red.” This might be the ideal time for Ubisoft to introduce something Assassin’s Creed has avoided like it avoids the modern day storyline: A starring female protagonist. Not only are conditions for this “bold” move ideal, but I would argue the company has to do it. Let’s talk about it.

Let’s Talk About the Female Assassins

Before we go on, I know I should address the series’ existing heroines, lest anyone accuse me of not thoroughly covering my material. I’m aware that Assassin’s Creed has given us a few heroines already -- they’ve even said that the female characters are the canon leads.

However, as we talk about it, I think you’ll notice a common theme with all of these characters. I call it the Not So You’d Really Notice It effect. We’re told they’re definitely the canon characters and are important to the history of the series . . . but Not So You’d Really Notice It.

Evie Frye

The ninth game, Assassin’s Creed Syndicate, was the first in the main series to feature a playable female character. Syndicate follows the adventures of twin Assassins Jacob and Evie Frye, who are attempting to retake London from Templar control. Now, according to the developers, Jacob and Evie were supposed to be equal co-leads in the title -- but Not So You’d Really Notice It. Jacob dominated in all of the marketing, and Evie’s story in the actual game is static and boring compared with his. She has fewer story quests -- should the player so choose (some missions you can select which twin to play), they only have to play as Evie for about 30% of the game.

To be fair, this is not just because Evie is a woman -- another factor is that Ubisoft was trying to marry its two different kinds of protagonists into one game. I mentioned this when I first reviewed the title, but traditionally AC protagonists fall into one of two camps: They’re either reserved stoics with a temperamental streak (Altair, Connor, Shay) or charismatic, flirtatious extroverts (Ezio, Edward, Arno). Ubisoft has always been better with the latter, rather than the former -- or rather, the games in which the extroverts star seem to be better received.

Ubisoft knows how to write a story starring a character like Jacob. They don’t know what to do with stiff-upper-lipped Evie besides make her perpetually irritated at Jacob. Her brother gets to undergo a whole character arc, while Evie doesn’t really get the same treatment. To reiterate, I don’t think that’s just because of her gender -- but I’m also convinced that was at least part of it.

Syndicate also hides its most interesting character in what amounts to a mini-game: Lydia Frye, a WWI-era British Assassin spy who worked alongside Winston Churchill. You’d be hard-pressed to find a better hook for a character anywhere in the series, but Lydia is only in about an hour of the game, total. I would love for Ubisoft to make a game about her, but I know how likely that is to happen.

Aya, a.k.a. Amunet

In the next game, Origins, Ubisoft decided to change up the formula slightly by making the protagonist an older, married father. Bayek is himself a breath of fresh air, having a different motivation than other protagonists and not really fitting the previous templates. He’s assisted in his quest by his wife, Aya. She’s supposed to also be pursuing vengeance for their murdered son . . . but Not So You’d Really Notice.

Hold onto something, because this might just give you the vapors: Aya was originally supposed to be the main playable character in Origins. According to a Bloomberg report, the original plan for the game was to sideline Bayek early (it’s not exactly stated how) and for Aya to take over. However, if this Bloomberg report is to be believed, Aya was slowly pushed to the margins over the course of development.

You can see traces of this in the final game, as there are a few sequences where you play as Aya. She’s off on her own quest to avenge her son’s death, at least at first. One problem with her diminished role in the game is that her motivations are incredibly difficult to follow. She’s out for revenge, up until the moment she meets Cleopatra, with whom she becomes smitten and flips on a dime. She’s given some more screentime in the DLC, which I assume was because the higher-ups were no longer paying as close attention.

Kassandra

Out of all the female characters in Assassin’s Creed, Kassandra is probably the best-received. I’ve yet to hear anyone say they dislike her or, worse, are indifferent to her. While I only have anecdotal evidence, I’ve heard that some people who’ve never played Assassin’s Creed before jumped aboard because they wanted to play as this dry-witted, badass Amazon woman.

According to the aforementioned report, Odyssey was also originally conceived of with a solo female protagonist -- Kassandra. Her brother, Alexios, was in the game, but he was presumably consigned the role of villain Deimos. Eventually this morphed into the version of the game we have now, where the two are interchangeable protagonists, and whomever isn’t selected is Deimos. According to Ubisoft and Odyssey’s novelization, Kassandra is the canonical Eagle-Bearer -- but Not So You’d Really Notice It.

To be clear, the Assassin’s Creed meta-narrative is that a modern-day person is reliving the life of an historical figure via genetic memories. Having two distinct people who could be the protagonist doesn’t really work... at all. It’s not the only concession Odyssey makes in an effort to be more like an RPG, but it’s probably the one that requires the biggest break from established series conventions.

Eivor

This brings us to the most recent game, Valhalla, which once again features a man and a woman sharing the throne. In this case, they’ve ditched the idea that they’re separate people and just made them a single person named Eivor. You can choose to play as a male or female version of the character.

Eivor is a Viking warrior who departs Norway with their brother Sigurd and founds a settlement in England. They’re eventually drawn into the apparently eternal battle between the covert forces of chaos (the Assassins) and the oppressive forces of order (the Templars). It’s not helped by mysterious stranger (and future protagonist) Basim attempting to manipulate both Eivor and Sigurd.

Just like Kassandra, Female Eivor is the canonical character. Male Eivor is actually the Norse God Havi. Eivor is his reincarnation and thus shares his DNA. Once again, you can tell that the female character is supposed to have been the lead here: Eivor is a female name. The in-game character selection gives players the option to “Let the Animus decide” which makes Female Eivor the Viking-era protagonist but Male Eivor the Asgard-era protagonist.

WTF, Ubisoft?

As you can see, Ubisoft has come very, very close to having a female protagonist lead one of its titles. But every time it’s come close, it’s choked at the concept stage, throwing in a male protagonist as a preemptive tonic. Why did this take place?

Apparently the directives to change all of these games from women-led to shared adventures or male-led came from the marketing department or Ubisoft CCO Serge Hascoët. Both claimed that games led by female characters wouldn’t sell. The report doesn’t say whether that same thought process applied to Valhalla, but I think I can assume so.

To be fair to Ubisoft, that presumption may not have been too far off. According to director Scott Phillips, the majority of Odyssey players chose Alexios, though he added that their popularity was about even in playtesting. But I take that with a grain of salt -- the entire games industry has historically been gun-shy about female protagonists and gives them much less marketing than they might otherwise receive.

I’m not even going to dedicate much space to Assassin’s Creed: Chronicles, which gave separate episodes to some peripheral Assassins of history. The China episode is led by Shao Jun, but I can’t exactly give Ubisoft props for that -- for one, she’s sharing the spotlight with Arbaaz Mir and Nikolai Orelov. For two, Chronicles is an offshoot game that got precisely zero marketing compared with the mainline titles.

The only character in the franchise so far who has carried a game entirely on her own is poor Aveline de Grandpre, the protagonist of Liberation. Honestly, Liberation is so unusual compared with the rest of the series that I have to believe it was a fluke. It had to have been made while Ubisoft higher-ups were looking the other way -- and given that it was originally a PlayStation Vita exclusive, I wouldn’t have blamed them for not paying attention.

Also, I want to be clear that I bear the male protagonists in these games no ill will at all. Jacob is a glorious himbo; Bayek is complex and original; Alexios has some of the series’ best voice acting; and Male Eivor is an awesome Viking warrior, and we can never have enough of those. I love this series’ badass men. I just want them to stay in their own games to give the badass women a chance to shine.

Forward to the Past

With all of this history, let’s talk about what the future holds for Assassin’s Creed. We already know that the next game in the series is Assassin’s Creed Mirage, set in 9th Century Baghdad. It’ll star Basim, the mysterious stranger from Valhalla. No female counterpart, but he will have a female mentor character, a Persian Hidden One (precursor to Assassins) named Roshan. Funnily enough, Roshan got almost as much focus in the reveal as Basim, most likely because she’s voiced by Shohreh Aghdashloo.

Other than Mirage, Ubisoft is working on games codenamed “Jade” and “Hexe.” Jade is a mobile RPG with a customizable player character set in ancient China -- doesn’t interest me much, seems designed to capture the Chinese mobile audience. “Hexe” is a cipher, and we have no details about it from which I could speculate on what kind of story to expect.

The game I wish to focus on is Codename Red, which Ubisoft announced during its big show earlier this year. Codename Red is the fulfilment of a longtime fandom wish: An Assassin’s Creed game set in historical Japan. Players have been asking for this because its such an obvious fit for the series mandate: The fictional Assassins and the historical ninja are obviously simpatico, and Japan has a number of points in its history where the traditional Assassin vs Templar narrative would fit perfectly.

So far we don’t know much about the game. According to the trailer, it’s set in “Feudal Japan” (which could be anywhere within a roughly 500-year period), it’ll have the action-RPG gameplay of Odyssey and Valhalla, and it’ll let players live a “shinobi fantasy.” That’s all we’ve got to work with, outside of rumors.

Now let me explain why this game should have -- nay, cries out for a female shinobi to lead.

The Land of the Rising Sun

Ubisoft has used Japan as a setting in the expanded AC universe, most notably in the French novel Blade of Aizu and in Memories the card game -- yes, Assassin’s Creed had a digital card game. The latter revealed that the Assassins established a Brotherhood in Japan during the Sengoku Period by allying with the country’s ninja, including Hattori Hanzo.

Let me paint a picture of the kind of female character we’d have if Ubisoft actually moved forward with this idea. We’ll call her “Akane” for reference. Suppose that we start in feudal Japan -- perhaps slightly before the age of Hattori Hanzo, but still within the Sengoku Period -- and Akane is a young merchant, perhaps someone who participates in the burgeoning trade with newly arrived Europeans. One day something happens that almost makes her a casualty in this time of upheaval -- I leave it to those who are more well-versed in Japanese history to say what.

Akane obtains a Hidden Blade, either from one of her European friends, or perhaps a member of the Chinese Assassin Brotherhood (Shao Jun would have been active around this time). Determined to keep the common people from being wrapped up in the machinations of those in power, Akane swiftly begins growing a network of spies across the region, participating in several covert assassination missions, and essentially starting an Assassin’s bureau all by herself in Japan.

I don’t have the requisite academic background to speak from authority on the subject, but even cursory research shows that female spies, assassins, and warriors were not rare in Japan. In fact, one such historical figure, Mochizuki Chiyome, recruited an entire spy network of female shinobi. She’s a character in Memories, albeit working for the Templars and opposed by Hattori Hanzo. There is historical precedent aplenty for this “Akane” character, and I’m excited just at the idea of what Ubisoft could do with her if they really cared enough.

Having said all that, I’m not going to bother giving an historical justification for a female protagonist in this game. I am not going to address them directly, but the misogynistic fuckwits who oppose the concept of a female protagonist on principle (or the illusion of principle) often use “historical accuracy” as a flimsy shield for their real intent. I don’t want to even give the impression that I’m meeting them on their level. Because here’s the fun thing: Historical accuracy could not possibly matter less in the Assassin’s Creed series.

Nothing is True...

If we’re being very honest with each other (and we always are here in my house), AC’s pretentions to historical accuracy have always been shallow at best. For the last few years, the developers have tried to position AC as some kind of portal to a proper history education, which is commendable and also kind of adorable given how little their series resembles real world events. (Those Who Came Before, anyone?)

But leaving aside all of that, the entire conceit of the series is that history was not as we’ve been taught it. Major forces in the world have deliberately obscured or buried historical facts and figures, and the version that we’ve been taught is a sanitized version palatable to the Templar overlords. If you played Black Flag and spent any time in the modern day (though if you avoided that, I wouldn’t blame you), you’ll remember that the entire point was that Abstergo is Templar-washing the historical people who’ve opposed them.

Connor became a brutish savage. Ezio became a deranged serial killer. Altair became an arrogant heretic. Aveline was lauded, but they notably cut off her story around the time she pretended to join the Templars, making it seem that she did come around the “right” way of thinking. I found that part of Black Flag surprisingly clever -- while we, the players, know that’s not an accurate view of their lives, we can also see how Templars can paint that picture with just a slight twist of the facts. When it comes to history, it matters who tells the story.

My point being that this is the most elegant venue ever to tell a story about a person who may not have a whole lot of historicity. Oh, you don’t think women could have feasibly been warriors and assassins at this time and place in history? That’s what the Templars want you to think! Especially when you consider that the Templars in the games are traditionally the rich and powerful, while the Assassins recruit from society’s oppressed and downtrodden. Seriously, I could not create a better stage than this to tell this kind of a story.

...Everything is Permitted

One thing I have not yet addressed is why it might be in Ubisoft’s best interest to put a woman in the lead of this game. Three words: Ghost of Tsushima. Let me expand.

Players have been asking for a Japanese Assassin’s Creed game since the series began, but Ubisoft never delivered on that. AC3 creative director Alex Hutchinson once said, by way of explanation for why they weren’t considering it, “People on the internet suggest the most boring settings. The three most wanted are WWII, feudal Japan and Egypt. They're kind of the three worst settings for an AC game.”

He later added, “Feudal Japan would work as an Assassin's game, for sure, but I feel like it would start to look like 'oh, have I played this?' You know what I mean - 'oh, I've been a ninja before, I've been a samurai before'." Well, if the problem was that ninja and samurai were too common for Ubisoft, then they’re really not going to like the market into which Codename Red will launch.

In terms of a quasi-historical fantasy game set in Japan where players are a sneaky anarchist people’s hero trying to topple a militant regime, we’ve got Ghost of Tsushima. And it was both a great game and hugely successful -- enough so that I’m not sure Ubisoft should try to beat it.

To make matters more unfavorable, Ghost of Tsushima 2 is heavily rumored to be in the works. Team Ninja is also working on Rise of the Ronin. Honestly, if even one other “Japanese historical fantasy” title launches in the same year as Codename Red, then it’s going to be in trouble.

So if Ubisoft really wanted to stand out, they could do something I’m quite certain the other games won’t do. It’s a really easy solution, too: Make the protagonist a woman. The historical background is there, insofar as Ubisoft has ever needed it to be. They’ve come very close to doing it many, many times. Now I want to see this franchise grit its figurative teeth and take the plunge of actually giving a woman the starring role.

Appendix: Reality Check

Having said my piece, I wanted to add that I’m aware just how remote the possibility of this actually happening is. While female game protagonists are not as rare as they once were, and studios are becoming slightly less reluctant to greenlight a game with a woman in the lead role, the chances of Ubisoft finally giving in and making a female Assassin-led title are smaller than I’d like.

In part, the problem is Ubisoft. The company’s alleged culture of hostile, noxious masculinity was only revealed recently, and I’ve seen no sign that it’s made significant enough improvement to give me hope. For one thing, TheGamer recently reported that devs are actively avoiding Red because director Jonathan Dumont allegedly has a history of being verbally abusive, particularly to women.

The other part of the problem is that, as optimistic as I am that there’s a sea change in the industry, a game with a female lead character is still a Big Deal . . . and not the kind of Big Deal that publishers want. And Ubisoft is not just any publisher -- it’s a publisher that has proven, time and again, that it’s not willing to put a woman in the spotlight all by herself.

I can’t lie: That makes me very sad. Having a female character should not be a Big Deal. It should not be something that requires extensive rewrites in order to shoehorn in a male option to steal her thunder. I can promise you that, when a Ubisoft creative pitched Mirage to his higher-ups, no one responded with, “Hmm, Basim, really? Not sure about that. Don’t you think we should make Roshan playable too, just for the people who want to play as a woman?”