Why The TEMPLARS Are RIGHT! | Assassin's Creed PHILOSOPHY

[@KnightofGaming1118]

You either die an assassin, or live long enough to become a Templar.

[@linongonzales4750]

Who Shay?

[@stormreaper7]

Shay Cormac, Baptiste, Lucy Stillman to name a few.

[@GacLosen6556]

@@KnightofGaming1118 not me. Never me. Been playing since AC1. I still fully believe in the Creed.

[@marslowell3992]

Agreed

[@Johnny3Batony]

You mean people grow up?

[@darthnater9731]

When I was a kid I wanted to be an assassin now that I’m in my 20s I realize that the Templars aren’t wrong. May the father of understanding guide us

[@tylerdai88]

Especially when you realize assassin are a bunch of hypocrites and who will take you out if your view differs from them. AC 3 made me start to consider the templars point of view. Rogue made me see clearly what the assassins are.

[@darthnater9731]

@@tylerdai88 Altair, Ezio, Edward, Connor, and Bayek would be disgusted with the way Achilles was running the colonial brotherhood

[@nobleking7636]

Hell Yeah ever since I saw what the Templars were about in AC3 I decided they would be the faction I run with

[@infinityguy16]

*hidden blade comes out* Possa il tuo Dio giudicare il tuo arrivo. Requiescat in Pace

[@jeramysamarawickrama7633]

The game that made me realize the templars are right was ac 1 like the original. Apart from al mualim every templar we kill gives good reason. Christian and muslims were working together towards peace but the assassins are so obsessed with "freedom". Truth is templars method is kill one to save a thousand. Which is better than everyone choosing their own sides and starting wars to the end of times

[@samhayes-astrion]

Assassins: Freedom of choice! Templars: Hold humanity accountable! Isu: The world is literally gonna end.

[@legohunter1020]

Haytham Kenway and Shay P Cormac showed me how the Templars are right.

[@chris_elkins2093]

shay is arguably the best assassin/templar he actually used common sense and could realize when templars and assassins were wrong and right which granted in rogue the assassins were just totally evil they knew that taking the pieces of eden from the underground temples would cause destruction but yet didn’t care and just wanted it specifically to use them as weapons against the templars they are quite literally terrorists

[@sisifo-12]

@@chris_elkins2093yeah man, Assassins Creed is like Cs, the assassins are tr and templars are ct, the assassins tries to plant the bomb and the templars tries to avoid it

[@JamesReborn2023]

@@chris_elkins2093 well yeah. “Nothing is true, everything is permitted” so “do as thou wilt.” They are quite literally Satanists (self worshiping kind)

[@firestrikerii810]

@@chris_elkins2093no

[@Basilisk650]

I wish there were more assassin creed games where you could play as a Templar, it would shine more on the perspective and exploring the modern templars objectives and plans.

[@armandoguerra7658]

More? There haven’t been any, Rogue is half a Templar game, not even a whole one…..

[@firestrikerii810]

@@armandoguerra7658Not true

[@firestrikerii810]

@@armandoguerra7658No

[@Phataku]

Something that a lot of people miss (or actively avoid) when doing a dissection of the Assassin's Creed series is the obvious political bent of their writers. Over and over, they show tyrants, 'evil businessmen', and histories villains as 'Templars', while implying that the Assassin's have always been fighting for freedom. This aligns with modern-day Marxist dialectic, and is evidenced by several of the TRUTH puzzles in Assassin's Creed Brotherhood. It's a type of puzzle where you scan a piece of art to reveal Assassins and Templar logos. The logos are superimposed over historical characters to imply their allegiance. For example, they imply that Adolph Hitler and Henry Ford are Templars, while casting several historical 'good guys' as Assassins. However, while solving Glyph #10 in AC Brotherhood, scanning the photo of the communist revolutionary banner will reveal an Assassin's logo superimposed over the top of an image of Mao Zedong, history's greatest mass murderer, at over 80 Million dead. A seeming contradiction, until you remember that many modern-day Marxists (And apparently Ubisoft writers in 2010) revere Mao, and sing his praises. Of course a Marxist would cast Mao as one of the 'good guys'. As an Assassin, ironically enough. Also, the solution to Glyph number 7 requires revealing a 'Templar' ring on the finger of Chief Justice Roberts, followed by a letter detailing the complicity of Roberts and GW Bush in the Templar plan. This topic is avoided for obvious reasons, since it will almost always descend into a left-right political argument. But, it's there in the game, all the same.

[@Rengokuo4o6]

I agree. What did you think of assassin's creed rogue? One of the criticisms is that they switched the factions.

[@Phataku]

@@Rengokuo4o6 I enjoyed Rogue, but never finished it. The game play was a little too similar to Black Flag for my tastes. I much preferred the gameplay of Unity. I always thought that Ubisoft was leaving money on the table by not setting any games on the other side of the conflict, besides Rogue. There was clearly some dissention about whether or not the Assassins were 'good guys', or if it was all morally grey. In the game, it's Abstergo and the Templars that save Earth, while the Assassins run around murdering people with no real plan. Desmond and crew are still trying to figure out what's going on, all the way up to the CME, while the Templars are the ones who put a SUCCESSFUL plan into action to save the Earth. Succeeding where even the precursor aliens failed.

[@Adrian_Zamora98]

This is a goated comment. All the greats of history are made into evil templars in the franchise.

[@liamstewart2287]

This... And it's far more infuriating because it contradicts the first game. Rather than viewing the dichotomy in AC1 as 'freedom vs. order', it's far more effective to view it as 'individualism (Assassins) vs collectivism (Templars)', or 'deontology (Assassins) vs utilitarianism (Templars)'. Brotherhood snaps this dichotomy in half, as well as the intended one, which is why the politics & philosophy of this series are now both incoherent & all over the place.

[@Luvico]

@@Phataku You are so right. An excellent comment and exposure!

[@TeamJella]

Freedom is an invitation to chaos is no different than saying order is an invitation to tyranny. Tyranny is an invitation to revolution, and revolutions lead to chaos. The irony in Haythem's words is so amazing, it's irritating that no one can see it.

[@heistbros8575]

Yes. The assassins and templars are two sides of a coin balencing on its edge. Look at America, a lot of freedom even by today's standards you can have a lot more stuff but that doesn't mean there can't be order like laws

[@paulmayson3129]

There is only one answer to this question about order and freedom: equilibrium.

[@FrancisWallerston]

@@paulmayson3129 exactly

[@danpatrickth2759]

@@paulmayson3129 agreed

[@lucasgrey9794]

Tyranny doesn't lead to revolution. America's second president was far more tyrannical than King George ever was. In fact, Americans were more free under the King than they were under George Washington.

[@willforest5302]

The Templars have the conservative view of freedom, they see freedom not as the lack of order and authority but as a form of spontaneous order, the highest form of order. an order where society is strong enough to create its own order rather than the lesser order that things like the government or the Templar order imposes on society. in this view you have to impose order first, create law and strengthen society before you can relax your grip on society and make freedom, (spontaneous order), possible. Think of it as the Templars being gardeners trying to make a flourishing ecosystem, at first you have to put in a lot of work to get it in order before it becomes self-sustaining. if this is how the Templars see the world, then to them Assassins interfere by destroying the order that is necessary for freedom to flourish, all in the name of that freedom. To a Templar the Assassins actually have admirable goals, they just go about it in a counterproductive way by trying to skip straight to freedom without doing the necessary foundation work to make freedom possible, which leads to anarchy and chaos instead of freedom.

[@alittlepuertoricanboy1993]

If ALL Templars truly believed that, I don't think the Assassins would be fighting them

[@laddanerskit3199]

My biggest issue with the assassins is by far the naivety. If the goal is peace and you truly are wise then you would know that it takes a lot more than holding hands and singing kumbaya.

[@satriadicky3732]

You forgot about missing ring fingers and blood and death, that will surely bring us peace😂

[@DALLAS_1985]

An assassins creed spin off where you play as an templar would be so cool (I know that in rougue you play as an templar, but my idea for that game would be a normal character who believed in the templar ideologies from the beggining)

[@minihalkoja590]

I agree. And make the gameplay a little less "Assassin'y." I'm not saying they should strip away all of the parkour and aerial assassinations. I'm saying that the gameplay should be more cautious, just like it sometimes was in Rogue. If you're a Templar and the Assassins know it, you should have to watch your back more often. To keep yourself more safe, you have to keep the entire city's security high by staying ahead of the Assassins' plots and other "freedom enabling" activities. They might try to spread bullcrap about the Templar order's public face, so you run a false flag operation and bribe the announcers and presses to soil the Assassins' reputation instead. Fund the slums and see them grow into a better place that loves the Templars. And do some favors to "legally" shift the city bigshots to defund and tighten security patrols in the districts that are a bit too well acquainted with the hooded freedom society. The assassins are no match against the power of politics. And of course, root out all the bureaus and find a way to infiltrate it. Surely if you keep catching Assassins, one of them is gonna spill the secret code you need to get in. Then just trash the place and make it a new orphanage or something. The Assassins wouldn't dare to take it back now.

[@takerweapon1]

I'd love to see the gameplay of Odyssey and Valhalla be the benchmark for said spin-off series..

[@bzunderdog695]

The great thing about AC is that both sides are both right in a certain point of view. It really depends as mentioned in AC1 and other creed games is how each organization goes about achieving their goals.

[@indedgames4359]

Kassandra even Pointen out that ther neds to be Balance. Though the assasins ar morelikely to aggre on this the templers will Not wich is why ultimatly when it comes down to it ther evil .. Just lock at modern templers how ther portrayed..

[@Rensune]

AC1-Templars AC2 series (everything with Ezio) Assassins AC3- Templars AC Origins- Assassins Etc.

[@chris_elkins2093]

@@Rensunewrong ac1 templars we’re totally in the wrong

[@Rensune]

@@chris_elkins2093 Did you listen to Any of them? The only one that was "Wrong" was Al Mualim. (And that one that loved executions)

[@firestrikerii810]

Assassins aren’t right

[@SomeonelolK]

I think this is an interesting perspective on the Assassins and Templars. Great video! :)

[@pxapologetics7889]

"freedom is peace" "everything is permitted" Sounds good to me!

[@legohunter1020]

Oh no. It's an invitation to chaos.

[@yohanani6838]

@@legohunter1020 true

[@faxenmacher4633]

Freedom and safety are often diametrically opposed, that is why assassins are by their nature dangerous. In a sense, safety (a mechanism to control danger) favours the mediocre, whereas freedom (a lack of control) favours the elite (in a sense of sheer ability). Contradictory to this is also the nature of control, which spawns an artificial elite by sheer proximity of the mechanism that controls danger - in our view, this is like when a mediocre person is gifted undue power. I suppose such contradictory things are better interpreted through a Daoistic perspective: which is to say, I'm an idiot and I don't have clue 😅

[@LordVader1094]

Freedom is a path to violence by its nature. Especially if "everything is permitted".

[@JustHereToLurkYT]

Freedom is peace everything is permitted as long as it is To commit sin

[@DionysiusTao]

Bro where are you come back and drop another banger like this!

[@deleted5794]

To all my fellow Templars, May the Father of Understanding guide us. Also, great video man!

[@MrGondor123]

Me whos for the assassins: 😐…😈

[@usamamohammed2357]

May the father of understanding guides us ❤❤

[@RandomBruv65]

Nothing is true, everything is permitted

[@minihalkoja590]

May the Father of Understanding guide us.

[@PiracyandDumbbells]

May the Father of Understanding guide us.

[@Abdullah_binStacy]

From what I've learned in my Philosophy class it sounds like the Templars believe in Hobbes' philosophical beliefs, which to an extent I agree. Hobbes says that the state of nature is war and chaos and to have a structured peaceful society you must have order under a leader who's willing to keep this order and peace. I agree with Hobbes because humans will always choose to be under the rule of a ruthless dictator rather than live in a society with no rules and the possibility of what could happen are endless. Even in revolutions, the American Revolution, Russian Revolution, the Iranian Revolution, all of them share in common that those revolutionists establish their ideal structured society based on order.

[@Claudia_Ackermann]

No one pointed it out but throughout the trilogy Altair is the only protagonist who found and understand that the Brotherhood Ideology is irony and contradicting to everything they believe and teach That's why he officially dissolve Masyaf because its a center of the Brotherhood, something that contradict that the Brotherhood is supposed to be a worldwide organization.. If it supposed to be a sort of international, then why is the Mongolian Brotherhood, or the European Brotherhood takes order from Masyaf which is based in Syria He also warned his successors to not have some kind of Council or a hierarchy in the Brotherhood... They should only have a single mentor as a teacher to train their novice to fight in battle and that's just it, but never tell them how they should act or what path they should take, instead encourage them to what they believe what best for themselves and support what the people's choice no matter what it is and even if they don't like it because its the people's choice, its comes from their freewill But no, look at in AC2, Brotherhood, Rogue and Unity... They all formed some sort of council, they form a hierarchy and they tell their assassins what and what not to believe They all tangled themselves into politics as well, regime changing and supporting leaders and conquerors, something that Altair told the Brotherhood that they should all be neutral and never aligned themselves in any nations or government

[@reachhero2386]

You make a lot of fair points no arguments. However you forget Revelation’s when Ezio explains the creed near the end of the game. “ To say that nothing is true is to realize that civilization is fragile and walks a very thin line. To say that everything is permitted is to accept the consequences of our actions weather glorified or tragic.” That’s is something you failed to mention in your argument. If you have I would like a time stamp so I can review again otherwise your argument losses stance. Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted.

[@Adrian_Zamora98]

Midwit take

[@stormreaper7]

The problem with the Creed lies within the second part of it. It’s kind of what set Shay on the path that he walked.

[@minihooperprod.8332]

It’s “everything is permitted” not “everything is permitted and there will be no consequences for your actions” assassins believe your permitted to do anything but acknowledge that even though you may be free to commit such acts that there will be consequences

[@exile6688]

Of course we know there's consequences. It's just that our actions are the expression of what the people want. Sure you can keep the people protected by the rule of the few. But the problem you run into is that you'd quickly stiffle any chance for progress. Any meaningful progress anyway. And we evolve as a species or die.

[@redlandswest]

I side with the Templars🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿. Order, purpose and direction are requirements for a productive, happy and strong society. A lack of Order, purpose and direction will allow ones self to indulge in degeneracy and further weaken themselves, others and all of society.

[@Randive]

degeneracy is subjective

[@lecobra418]

The technological era we live in created far more degeneracy than a free state would. When you're busy working the field you don't have time to peg your anus.

[@gamevidz8763]

No it’s not. There’s a certain line where humans should not cross. That’s what order is for. That’s why we have laws

[@tristankawatsuma8962]

I do believe both sides back controversial figures. For instance, the Templars started WW2 to create a new world order which only failed thanks to Roosevelt dying early and the Assassins killing Hitler. They also funded the Atomic Bomb project leading to the creation of dangerous super weapons. On the other side though, the Assassins also back people like the Tokugawa Shogunate and Napoleon. Now as someone who likes Japan and wants to move there, I view the Tokugawa shogunate as being better than Imperial Japan because the former didn’t launch invasions like its predecessors and successors, at least not on a massive scale. However it was still a dictatorship which avoided invasion for 200 years by closing off its borders. And yet it was the Assassins who backed Tokugawa Ieyasu and helped kill his enemies because of his Anti-Christian stance, which allowed them to kick out foriegn Templars leaving the Japanese Rite to fend for itself, likely being driven to near extinction until the opening of Japan. Meanwhile with Napoleon, the dude literally came close to conquering the entire European continent. Granted we only see the French Brotherhood in the Revolution, but it does make me wonder if they just back whoever is an enemy of the Templars no matter their background. Of course the Templars hurt their argument by trying to use ancient weapons to control or monitor people to an extreme. Meanwhile the worst we’ve seen of the Assassins is cause an earthquake due more to their ignorance and determination to their cause than intentional actions. I like to believe there is some more nuance, but honestly right now the series seems to be framing that good Templars like Kenway, Cormac, and others are more of exceptions than the norm. Kind of like how the Galactic Empire is always portrayed as pure evil even though the governments before and after were failing in times of crisis, though to be fair the Empire backed criminals to hunt down Rebels. Honestly, I don’t think anybody wants to add nuance to narratives of freedom fighters fighting oppressive governments because not only are such conflicts popular when they stick to that wording, nowadays politics have been polarized. Sometimes it seems that nowadays, you either have to keep the status quo exactly as is or completely topple it to start anew. I’m in the middle, preferring reform over revolution and civil consistency, but heroic rebels vs evil empire to most of the world is just too popular and possibly quite relatable.

[@dibarra5461]

In a way the major flaw in both factions is the corruption and the use of inhumane ways to achieve power and personal gain. The slavery, the genocides, they both were used by both the assassins and the templars to achieve their goals. The templars supported the axis powers in WW2 and other empires with questionable human values. However, the assassins were no different since they supported the Ottomans, you know, the ones who did countless massacres, enslaved women for their nobles' harem and kidnapped children to turn them to soldiers. In the end, they both have sacrificed innocent lives for their own benefit. Now, looking in a deeper and perfectionist application of the ideology of both assassins and templars, I personally think the templars ideology is more sustainable than the assassin ideology. The templars seek order in order to assure humanity's survival while the assassins seek to establish absolute freedom for everyone to do whatever they want, the problem there is that in absolute freedom it is included the freedom to do morally questionable things, in other words, anarchy. And I think we've seen enough scenarios in movies, books and TV shows to see what would happen if people live in a world without laws and order.

[@tristankawatsuma8962]

@@dibarra5461 I think to be fair to the Brotherhood, their version of freedom is a little more controlled than what we and the Templars think. Meanwhile, the Templar ideology too easily allows the people in power to become corrupted. Of course, both sides support historical figures and governments pretty corrupt and authoritarian. Even if you argue the Assassins were tricked by people like Napoleon, it would call into question if they are too trusting or if they like the Templars empower the wrong people.

[@aisnota5192]

Okay, but how come all the assholes and worst people in history keep ending up on the side of the Templars? It's like having Alex Jones on your side on any subject. SOMETHING is wrong and it needs fixing.

[@LordVader1094]

Because writers lol Also Anglo-Saxons were the good guys historically in Valhalla.

[@wtfisthis96]

Who write history? Yeah that's right. If a history book tells you this man was bad, he was probably good.

[@martpalamine7040]

@@wtfisthis96I don’t know…I think there’s some exceptions with definitive proof…

[@TaikaviittaX]

How doesn't this video have lot more views? And how your channel doesn't have lot more subscribers? Now you have one more subscriber. :)

[@legohunter1020]

No worries. I just watched it. It's increased. 😎

[@TheManWhoErasedHisNane]

Besides Edward doesn’t become an assassin until after the story by the time he has retired from his pirate lifestyle he only helps the assassins during the story Adawale joins them during the story and we even get to play as him in his own dlc.

[@rustattack1312]

I think your conclusion was a bit weak, but you forgot to mention "To say that nothing is true is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile and that we must be the shepherds of our civilization. To say that everything is permitted is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious of tragic." - ezio auditore this is crucial in my opinion to understand what the assassin's creed philosophy was, because you have the same misunderstanding that Edward had "To recognize that nothing is true and everything is permitted, that laws arise not from divinity but from reason, I understand now that our creed does not command us to be free, it commands us to be wise" altair "nothing is true everything is permitted" isn't do as you please, it isnt a blank check, its you and your creed are morally responsible for every action or inaction you make, you will have to deal with the consequences of your actions.

[@indedgames4359]

Yes Templers Wer complet control dictatorship Assasins seek freedome but they never sayed ther wont be rules

[@nbBROFIST]

"To say that nothing is true is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile and that we must be the shepherds of our civilization. " this doesn't make any sense, why must the assassins be the shepherds of a civilization or civilizations for that matter, if truth doesn't exist? I'd personally say that the foundation of society (truth is what i'm assuming they mean here) is not at all fragile, as there are such things that are true no matter how you look at it 2+2=4 no matter how you look at it, if you answer with changing the definiton of 2 or 4 or + or - you are simply kidding yourself or lying to win the argument, for you still know that the understood definition of 2+2 does indeed equal 4. In fact to say there is no such thing as truth is cartoonishly evil because the only thing you could possibly hope to accomplish by stating such a blatant lie is to sow doubt that you can use to control the people willing to listen to you. "To say that everything is permitted is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious of tragic." If you are morally responsible for your own actions how can you permit everything? can you permit exploitation? can you permit genocide? from your statement that is the kind of world you want to live in, which is not the one I or any sane, moral and free human being wants. You are not the only one one who will need to live with your actions.

[@rustattack1312]

@@nbBROFIST you misunderstand, everything is permitted the earth will not stop you, but not everything permitted is moral you have to deal with the consequences, everything and anything can be justified by an individual which is why their is no truth but all actions create a reaction and not every action is moral but moral or not sometimes you dont have another option dont confuse things being permitted with morally correct remember your not supposed to be free your supposed to be wise thinking how your actions will effect the present and future as for your points regarding genocide and etc. Its permitted the founding fathers, nazis,etc were all permitted to be slave traders and put people in camps where they got gassed or in the states giving kerosene baths at the mexican boarder camps just because it can happen doesnt make it moral that is the point being made. everything is permitted but your responsible for your actions glorious or atrocious its all based on your actions what legacy if any gets left behind

[@nbBROFIST]

@@rustattack1312 "but not everything permitted is moral" - here lies your fundamental contradiction, if you have to face (negative) consequences for your (immoral) actions you are not permitted to do said action. "everything and anything can be justified by an individual which is why there is no truth" - You are not permitted to do something simply because you say to yourself you are, again 2+2=4. It doesn't matter if you say it is 5. "Its permitted the founding fathers, nazis,etc were all permitted to be slave traders and put people in camps where they got gassed " - permitted by whom? the world? the world does not permit or deny anything, it simply exists. What is permitted or not must come down to us as individuals. If we agree that it is so, then you must put constraints on your actions, or become either a fool or evil trying to do the impossible or immoral. If i were to take your definition of permitted then the phrase "everything is permitted" would come to resemble "anything is possible" which is also false, since humans cannot fly in our current state for example. "just because it can happen doesnt make it moral that is the point being made." here you are smuggling out morality from your statement"everything is permitted but your responsible for your actions" how can you be responsible for your actions if you have no morality, and rely purely upon wisdom? you are making it into something inbetween the two terms "permitted" and "possible" which only serves to confuse and mislead .

[@rustattack1312]

@@nbBROFIST the problem is the quote is a "truth claim" or rather an observation that "nothing is true everything is permitted" its not based in morality never was meant to be, Its only about being wise and understanding what your actions will cause. where morality comes in is the individual/the assassins as a collective

[@alang.bandala8863]

The Templars have a point, but their methods are questionable and easy to corrupt.

[@kaybevang536]

I wish they did a similar formula as Brotherhood like using Assassin teammates in the story to kill other guards

[@micstorm6735]

There is one thing that I think was missed in this explanation, "nothing is true". In the first game this actually referred to the illusions people experience, whether through their perspectives or through the Apple. How does this fit?

[@aisnota5192]

3:12 Actually King Alfred was the one who..... wait, what year did this come out?

[@exile6688]

"Nothing is true, everything is permitted. It would be contradictory if that were doctrine but it is simply how we view the world. To say nothing is true is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile and that we must be the shepherds of our own civilization. To say that everything is permitted is to realize that we are the architects of our actions and that we must live with the consequences. Whether glorious or tragic." Meaning yes they do have the responsibility to steer society, but based on balance, evolution, and peace alone. Realizing the fundamental truths that escaped even Haytham's sharp mind, chaos is needed to move man to its destined place, order can serve chaos, and chaos can serve order. But to do that the scales must always be balanced. In essence, the Precursors showed Desmond that rather the Assassins over time lost their way and that if they hadn't it was the Templar's great cross that was wrong. Hell Tores admits this himself in Black Flag. And he's right. If the Templars actually implemented their ideals, imposing order on chaos you'd break the people in the body but not the mind. And as soon as another party offers another way the mind inspires the body to revolt. People do fall in line with one person, yes, but one must never forget that they do so willingly, exercising their freedom of choice. That is why most would rather have a government or corporation in which all chaos does is cut out any negatives so the people learn and know to improve upon the agreed system that is why Hidden One/True Assassin Philosophy works. And because even after all of that man has freedom of choice the mind will allow itself to be insnared willingly and encourages the body to follow naturally. No wonder when Alfred the Great chose to reform/better the Templars he chose to do it with ideas of the opposition. No wonder why Julius Caeser, The Father of Understanding himself respected the Hidden Ones so much. And no wonder why, in part, the Assassins have as many Templar defectors among their ranks as the Templars have Assassin defectors or people that at least understand why the Assassin beliefs do make sense in their own way. Also, this is the message revealed in AC Brotherhood. Like who are we talking: Marcus Aurelius, Giovani Borgia, Rodrigo Borgia, Emilono Tores, Yasukae, Shay Cormack, Franzwa Dela-Sair, all three of Shay's sons, Haytham Kenway, Avilen, Edward, even Alfred the Great and Julius Caeser. The Great Reformer/Innovative Philosopher and The Father of Understanding themselves. Edward and probably Yasukae started or will start their games out as templars. Giovani started his life out as a templar but got disillusioned by his sibling's behaviors and dad's underhanded tactics and defected,(he's the star of his own game when he's an assassin), James Cormack flirts with the idea of defection often while his elder and younger brothers Conor and William ultimately say screw it and join the Assassins. Shay's an Assassin in a Templar's body. Julius and Alfred both temporarily join the Brotherhood in their respective games and walk away with a completely changed perspective. The rest either keep a very open mind or by the time of the height of their careers downright respect the Assassins.

[@michaelvillarama7584]

"The people chose nothing. It was done by a group of privileged cowards seeking only to enrich themselves. They convened in private and made a decision that would benefit them. Oh, they might have dressed it up with pretty words, but that does not make it true." - Haytham/ACIII That quote alone made me shift from liking the Assassins as a child growing up playing Assassin's Creed to now siding with the Templars today. There needs to be order and structure.

[@quicksilver9892]

But what the templates work toward isn't order it's control, and what the assassins fight isn't any order in society, they fight tyranny.

[@FIAT-LUX-AETERNA]

The assassins seem cool as a kid, but as an adult, you understand the templars motives and realize that they are the smarter choice.

[@Geo-Real]

Superb analysis! I always thought that about the templars.

[@oliviamoore3426]

They aren’t right. A mix between the both is the right way

[@badreedinedjellali1328]

yeah tamplers are just narcissisti duchbags who call anyone who is benithem a peasant or waste of space that's the kinda mentality of I'm rich and your just poor peasant that I dislike in villains

[@lecobra418]

There is literally no contradiction in believing in freedom and killing people who do not share your opinion of freedom if you think they pose a threat to your beliefs. They chose to be wrong. You're doing a common misconception, that one's freedom ends where another freedom starts. It's wrong. Freedom ends where you choose to end it. AC is not a game about good guys vs bad guys, it's about two very different visions of life, liberty vs tyranny who act the very same way to reach the same goal, Assassins think people should be free to be wrong (and pay the consequences of their actions) and Templars think people should be forced into peace. Templats aren't looking for peace per se, they're looking for total domination of the people while Assassins act as an opposing force to prevent them from succeeding, they cannot win that war and they know it, their fight, is about the necessary balance between two opposing forces.

[@planetvegeta6031]

wrong

[@FIAT-LUX-AETERNA]

You sound like every terrorist organization ever created.

[@Nunu-iv5ox]

I agree with assassins live in the a world with a choice I live, instead of a world of a sober world in a giant jail

[@looper2586]

I'm only at 3:33 in the video and I already see a need for a conceptual distinction between order and control. When the templars talk about order "they think order and chaos are somehow opposites and try to control what won't be". Their notion of "order" is a misnomer which is meant to conceptually justify their use of control so that they may stem the disorder/the destructive chaos which they perceive. However they do not realize that the chaos they see is a direct consequence of control. That's where the whole thing loops, the controller using his own creation in order to justify increasing his level of control. Now, that being said, to leave people to their "freedom" as the assassins would advocate does not mean that they are free and that they can make informed decision. It would be naive indeed to leave people "free to choose" without providing them with the proper guidance where they can make informed choices, without revealing to them the actual choice that they are facing. People's proclivity to choose "evil" choices is merely the consequence of a lack of discernment on their part, and therefore a lack of external guidance to enlighten their choices. No one can choose wrong who understands the full implications of his choices. It is therefore only an issue of ignorance where enlightenment/discernment is the key. So we need something in the middle, something that allows man to make a choice unlike what the templars would advocate, as much as we need a light to help people make conscious choices. Without a guide, let there be no illusion, people will simply fall for the most pressing urges powered by fear. Templars react to fear-based choices with control when it is the light that they should provide to show these people a better path.

[@Degenevesting]

Unity is by far the best AC game to play nowadays. Quintessential Assassin gameplay. Simple. Peak.

[@ladart5709]

Haythem says it though, “we do not need a creed or tenets”. The assassins understand that rules are necessary. Especially if we remember that the word assassin comes from assassayun to mean “loyal” and that the connection to hashish was propaganda against the assassins. In fact they were so committed to the rules that they would sacrifice themselves to uphold their ideals. The Templars boasted about order and control but it’s rooted in nihilism. This is why the Templar pledge says at the end “do so unto death, WHATEVER THE COST”. The Templar philosophy is blind devotion “may the father of understanding guide us” vs the assassin’s promotion and commitment to healthy skepticism and curiosity “nothing is true, everything is permitted”. Let’s also not forget that part of that “whatever the cost” to obtain order and control included slavery and mass killings. Balek mentions in AC Unity how he’s seen “entire city’s burned to the ground at the chance of killing a single assassin.” The Templar philosophy believes that the means are always justified if the end is in the name of order and control. The assassins, while being known for being effective killers, were more often sent on fetch and delivery missions, and if we look at the cannon of events the assassins target single individual as opposed to mass collectives. Let’s also remember that many of the stories in AC are kinda redemption stories because it’s about characters learning that having rules and pentameters to guid one’s self is important, and that we can’t always trust in society to have that same mindset so it’s up to the individual to balance both. The assassins are aware of this with their tenets as their tenets all focus on maintaining a mutual relationship (brotherhood) with the larger society. I don’t know, maybe it’s just me but its funny to me how all the Templars have to do is say “we believe in order and control” and fans just accept it like yeah why would the slavery, conqueror, tyrant king, lie to me.

[@weybye91]

But the templares are following rules to, and the templares are also helping people, in AC 1, we only see what "the assassin's" wants us to see, the doctor that "torment" the sick, is trying to help them. In Valhalla the doctor there sure does bad things, but those things further the medical help from broken to the plauge. Just like in our own history, the same guy that made the toxic gas during WW1 had already made something that would help growing crops

[@Skorm731]

In order to balance the contradictions of the Assassins and Templar ideologies, I had always thought. Freedom is peace. Severing the strings tied to a person will allow them to open their minds to excellent opportunities and happiness. But a limited form of order must balance that freedom, so that chaos does not fall upon those who are too weak to stand against it.

[@thehappynurgling3965]

But isn't that what the creed is supposed to represent? Freedom that ends where another's freedom starts. Protecting the weak from exploitation trough the strong. The assassins hold more power in that hierarchy so they follow stricter rules, they give up their freedom to an extent so that all of humanity is free to live as it pleases Of course, not all iterations of the assassin follow it in this way, that's what ezio says about dogma in revelations, the creed seems cynical and contradicting if followed dogmatically and that's what eventually brings down the order in the colonies, they become dogmatic, if assassins like shay where free to question the way of the order, the events of rouge would have been averted, the order reformed and brought back to their original teachings

[@VO1D333]

Why haven't you uploaded again

[@molonlabe4745]

"Everything is permitted." The very first tenant of the Assassin's Creed: "Stay your blade from the flesh of an innocent."

[@aaronlaughter6471]

We see how well the Assassins do that.

[@PiracyandDumbbells]

Who defines the innocent?

[@descree7]

i disagree. let me explain: when you push a wall, the wall pushes you back. what you're claiming in this video is that the wall can't push you, which makes sense. but it's a reaction after all and totally plausible. creed is a reaction, it of course can't make sense by itself. so templar ideology makes sense by itself, but for assassins you gotta consider them as the wall pushing back.

[@kaynhuros2050]

I am an assassin supporter and a templar supporter, i am both and neither. You are right, people can't always have freedom otherwise there is chaos, there can't always be order otherwise there is subjugation. Ezio once said, "To say that nothing is true, is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile, and that we must be the shepherds of our own civilization. To say that everything is permitted, is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious or tragic." Order is important as well as freedom, they are as equal as each other, shay left because of a terrible leader and a person who is caught up in grief that it blinds him to reason. Thats not to say anything about the templars is positive, they are examples of templars being bad people for their own gain as well ass killing many innocent people. Yet both are positive in a way that varies from someone caring the sick and the weak to freeing someone, however just because one person is compassionate and is a templar and the other person is an ass and is an assassin, does not mean he or she represents the creed nor the order, in fact just because their way of doing this can be considered good, does not mean its has flaws nor can be true or false Thats what nothing is true everything is permitted means, it means that no order is true not even order that looks perfect, hence why its not always true. Everything is permitted means that while you do have order you also must have freedom, you must live with the terrible or good things you have done So while most of the comments are templar supporters, i agree with them, HOWEVER i also think that being naive and being skeptic is an individual flaw and like i said before, just because it looks good doesn't mean it isnt perfect, hence the meaning of nothing is true, everything is permitted. Hence why when exists freedom there also must be order in it for freedom to be maintained, its like how you do maintenance on a machine, it is made of freedom, yet requires order to make freedom function properly. To much order and it will not function well and operate well but instead be forced to do what you will with no benefits, and while assassins do say that they want freedom, that is not quite what it means as al mualim said "Our Creed does not command us to be free. It commands us to be wise." It commands us not to go out and do what we want in the name of freedom, but rather be wise in maintaining freedom with order to compliment it, the templars while they have good reasons have bad methods the same as the assassins and its why if i were to choose i would choose the creed. Not for freedom, not for being naive but far from it as altiar wrote "Do we bend the rules in service to a greater good? And if we do, what does it say of us?" To me you dont bend the rules obviously but rather be wise as you live with them and not to be naive nor pessimistic but rather wise. Because there is no perfect creed nor order, and both tenants are flawed as they are with the foundations of society, but its recognising those flaws and being wise not to make those flaws So to the templars and the assassins i say this NOTHING IS TRUE, EVERYTHING IS PERMITTED LONG LIVE THE ORDER AND CREED AND MAY THE FATHER OF UNDERSTANDING GUIDE US

[@danpatrickth2759]

Agreed

[@thatemocat]

I approve of this sentiment, without a balance of Peace and Order. There is no true freedom.

[@joshuascroggins2823]

your understanding of what the assassins creed represents and what they are fighting for is really backwords and surface level at best.

[@henrydeseyn1562]

Good job keep u the work, nice and detail analysis.

[@Gnar05]

Look the only reason why i want to join the templars is to get some good weapons and armors.

[@simpeldisaster4533]

The extreme of order is tyranny, the extreme of freedom is chaos.

[@VOLDGAMER1]

I like it when ac has you questioning both sides like in ac3 when Connor finds out the patriots took his land after he defended then for so long, it makes you wonder "where the Templars right? " or in ac1 when they all told Altair that they had good reasons. It really humanized both sides. Sadly ever other ac games makes the Templars like in ac2 where they are nothing but mustache twirling villians for the most part

[@ambrose9821]

The real problem isn't inherently the ideology of either group though of course those ideologies put each other at odds, the problem at the heart of it all is the people who adopt them and use them, those same views from both groups as is shown can be used for great kindness or great evil from either side, the assassin's believe freedom is to be preserved because it will lead to peace, they believe that people have to be believed in, this is and isn't dangerous, hence why ezio learned that "everything is permitted" is actually a warning, they aren't exactly contradicting themselves because to them, killing those who would seek to completely dominate the wills of the people is a just and worthy cause, but their ideology became twisted in shays day and they lost sight of their goals, being so focused on relics of Eden and their power that they failed to see the implications of their own actions, while the templars were in a position to tread with more care and caution as it's their goals the assassin's are in such a rush to stop, hence the assassin's "creed" was in the hands of the wrong people, those who were strongly naive, meanwhile those like ezio and altiar became enlightened over time and were so famous because of the wisdom this achieved, wisdom clearly lost by the time unity came around, but then you go to the flip side, the templars, their goals depending on who was in charge varied from setting systems in place to make sure everyone's lives run smoothly and are improved (like in shays era) to complete and utter world domination through blinding power (such as the Borgias), then you get your grey areas too with the templars, some joined for money or the power or resources, joined because they wanted to further their own goals regardless of the desire, only complying with the higher ups enough to secure the funding but used by the higher ups to secure a goal whether wittingly or not, this is good and bad depending on when and who, so while both sides are valid and could be used in ways that would lead to true peace, it largely and I'd almost say solely falls to who is carrying those creeds as to whether it is ultimately good and right, just actions

[@ScareWest]

True, if there were great story tellers, this would be a topic of a future game "Who is right?". Seeing an Assassin and a Templar who have never known each other but working with each other to save mankind and, like Connor and Haytham, talk about their ideologies and their understanding of each others' view. Look at the start of the Templars which was forged by Alfred the Great wiping out the paganistic Order of Ancients because they did not accept nor believe in God Almighty. So, he took the concept of an organisation but would style it under the light of God and Christ. So begins the Templars whose aim is simply to instill Gods order so people can live their lives in peace, not through extreme oversight but following the teachings and humility of Christ. Truly having a story that goes into great lengths to capture all sides of Assassins and Templar thinking would be exhilarating. So much to discuss, then like other comments, who and why do people join their order? How does an organisation change and why? The philosophy brought by this series truly is the ultimate debate, how much freedom and how much order and control is right for society to live and thrive? Why cannot each understand the other and join together and take the best of both? These are some of the questions brought by this series, I hope they try to answer or examine and not simply leave it that Templars are just evil and Assassins righteousness. May the ONLY Father of Understanding guide us. PS: Forget the Isu, that seems to be only focusing on how to save the world, not helping to explain the battle of ideas between Templars and Assassins (besides their pieces of Eden).

[@oddcondor]

I think the righteousness of an Order is how much it compels and guides it's followers to do good, and restrains them from evil. If the Order can't convince its own believers to do good, how can it be applied to the masses in order to achieve their own respective versions of peace?

[@allblack1331]

I thinl the templars are part of the marix, thats why I fight for the assassin

[@arkfounder7056]

Assassin's literally only interested me in the franchise because of aesthetics, but the templar's got me into the series because of the story.

[@alejandrojimenezmota7889]

Understanding how the world works and who run it, no wonder why they completely destroyed this franchise and Patrice Desilets. This game was a menace.

[@jokuma5798]

As someone who also think the templars are in the right, I can see how both side think they are correct and they are not wrong. We saw both sides (most times templars) be objectively in the wrong, being more harmful than helpful. Sure freedom is a good thing, but there are cases where freedom is a curse, people feeling free to hurt others because they are granted the freedom to do so, while. Tyranny is a very real thing

[@marcs3768]

Your videos is very good. Make more ;)

[@Veteransolo]

Haytham Shay My two favourite characters.

[@harrisonwhite698]

Love the philosophical nature of this discussion

[@GentlemanBystander]

It's a fair point about Black Flag, Black Flag was a pirate game with Assassin's Creed sub-theme. I loved and still love Black Flag, but your point is completely fair.

[@seven7383]

I feel like the brotherhood eventually forgot what "nothing is true, everything is permitted" really meant. Of course, lacking context, the phrase sounds like it means "freedom is the goal", when it couldn't be any farther from the truth.

[@Barakon]

*reads title* NUH MOTHERFUCKING UH!

[@aungthukha2104]

Haytham and Shay were right. All the other templars were wrong.

[@roman2164]

I believe in peace through freedom. A little bit of rules is reasonable and enforcing the little rules in an adaptive way that promotes as much freedom as possible while avoiding harm is good. Freedom and fulfillment bring happiness. The so-called "Peace" through control never brings as much happiness as true peace through freedom.

[@pilgervater9218]

Assassins Creed Rogue made me change sides May the Father of Understanding Guide Us all

[@tungilgynch6044]

Traitor !!!

[@hollowkiller1011]

If you think the templars way of doing things is better look at America right now and see how the country is doing and that’ll give you the answer you need just saying

[@Super_27]

The right people have to be in power. There are bad Templars and good Templars like he said. Too much freedom has also led people to ruin this country.

[@worldnews2660]

America is not under the templar.

[@schalitz1]

America's problems are far deeper than that...

[@aisnota5192]

5:58 Wait, was he in the Order of the Ancients?

[@roberteischen4170]

I've o ly played through to the end of brotherhood. But honestly the longer I play, the more I get a sneaking suspicion the assassin are actually the bad guys.

[@velislavjan]

Nice video, keep it up!

[@lucabrandao5243]

The real point is: the Assassin's Creed world is filled with lies and misinterpretation. History and the world itself are just like ours, but the explanations of historical events are quite different from the ones we learn. Firstly, most of the History's official versions and documents were crafted to hide the truth from populace, hence our characters use the Animus, so they can see what really happened back then. For example, we learn from school that Adolf Hitler committed suicide, and that's the official explanation in the game as well. But lately we learnt he was actually murdered by the Assassins, and a story was made to hide the truth. Along with that we learn that all religions and philosophical points of view are nothing but a misinterpretation of our own genesis. A genesis that was handcrafted not from Gods, Nature or Reason, but from a precursor race that made us for slave work. A condition we fought back thousands of years ago and the recordings of it were washed from earth by a mass extinction. All that's left were vague clues and human beings lacking of direction, since our true original purpose was only to serve and to be commanded. Human being promptly began to fill the gaps by creating religions, philosophies and ideologies to reclaim our missing purpose. Many of these ideologies are pivot from all kinds of disgrace, misery, starvation and deaths. The point is, without actual knowledge of what's true, all our cosmovision traits fail to understand "the big picture" of our existence. The Assassins acknowleged that by the first piece of the phrase ("Nothing is true"). So, all wars and deaths we draw on ourselves have wrong principles by definiton. But, if people cannot find true purpose and meaning through these incomplete ideologies, where would they find it? In ourselves. Choosing our own path and creating a world that does not need an universal and external explanation of right and wrong, or a purpose. Instead, each one of us would find those answers ourselves, making room for all society do the same. Even tough someone chooses to follow a leader, he will do so by his own free will, not enforced. And he'll deal with his actions personally. That responsibility, the Assassins thought, would be sufficient to achieve true piece. Acknowledging our real purpose is only bigger than ourselves would make the need to compel others you're right (or enforcing it) unrelevant ("Everything is permitted"). The Creed only needs to hope this day will come and aid humanity not to fall on hands of those who'd use current ideologies to undermine everyone by force. That's why the tenets were made. Actually, they're not above anything else. Those tenets are to ensure the Creed doesn't get corrupted, if followed correctly. Proof is, when Al Mualim became corrupted, Altaïr used those very tenets to restore the Order. Same with Shay (who ironically is the only one who lives by the Creed correctly, even tough as a Templar LOL). The Order is not bigger than the lives it sworn to protect, that's why Bayek disapproved Gamilat's methods to recuit acolytes. In the other hand, Templars akcnowledge the pivot to all disgrace and misery humanking experiences were not product of false ideologies, but from our breakthrough from dominance. We were not designed to think freely, but to serve and be commanded, "That's why people are so inclined to fall in line as soon a someone takes charge. They want to be told what to do.They yearn for it! Little wonder that, since all mankind was built to serve!" (Haytham Kenway, ACIII). Our lacking of purpose come from the fact that we don't have any other than serve, and serving is what we should do. So, to prevent all humanity from killing itself trying to find the truth, they will forge one. A "New World" where people would be satisfied enough and stop killing each other. Quite like Madara wanted on Naruto series. An illusion where every one gets what they want, so they're gonna stop running impossible errands. The Templar are willing to use force if needed to, because it's a necessary evil to achieve a greater good. They seek power and influence to reach the Pieces of Eden and peform their plan. That is the philosophical war between Assassins and Templars.

[@Ma1q444]

Where u go bro please come back

[@HistoriaOrbis74]

The only problems that I have with AC Unity, is that the parkour is uneven.

[@anthonyn6517]

I don’t think there’s a single assassins creed game that I didn’t enjoy or not worth my money 1:39

[@tigga2300]

What gives the Templars the right to FULLY control people's freedoms, even if it is to bring peace. The Assassins fight to protect the growth of individuality and the spirit of melting pots of the world that bring us new cultures to love and enjoy, which the Templar's philosophy of control threatens. The Templars want to create a Utopia of peace, which is good, still, through fully controlling the freedoms of the people, they wrongfully destroy the freedom of individuality. The Assassins don't fight for blind freedom. They believe in order, but in the way that it was intended. This intention is explained by, Prince Suleiman, in "Revelations," when he says, "That is why we have laws that apply to everyone in equal measure." Just like the Tenants of the Creed are laws that Assassins must follow. The Templars don't have the right to act as Gods, just because they mean well. In the end, the Assassins are in the right.

[@tiolloyd9555]

Now we have an entire animated series showing that if the Templars won, the world would be a shitty fascist dystopia

[@adichong4416]

Black flag is the best but you are allowed to have opinions even if they are wrong

[@Yusufspider42]

Both have a different ideologies but the same goal peace they just have different ways

[@dibi8600]

the only time templars made sense, was shay and haytham

[@bigboss4993]

top 3 unity, black flag, brotherhood over 2 because it basically improved on it in every way and the crossbow and assassin's recruits

[@DJTS1991]

In a sense, by AC3, the game established the Templars and Assassin's can be as good or as bad as eachother, and it really depends on the time period. Both ideologies are right and wrong. What matters is the context of the situation. Some situations probably warrant control, and others warrant freedom. AC3 is interesting because for the first time, the Templars were in the right. And this is why we love Haythem so much. Connor, however, was wrong. There's a moment where Haythem flat out tells him George Washington even gave the order to murder his village, and because Connor is essentially a child in a man's body - very immature with delusions of grandeur and freedom - he idiotically chucks a tantrum and drops all contact, like a social justice warrior studying in College. Who is right or wrong then flutters back and forth between games, and its this dichotomy that is so interesting.

[@aswinraj_ar]

Who gave them the right to bring order to the people? And order and control gives the power to do anything they want, which results in tyranny. So imo the assassins are right.

[@TalonAshlar]

I agree that from a purely story and thematic perspective Unity is indeed one of the best Assassin's Creed Games but oh boy did it have issues

[@7th_phoenix546]

Neither are right, both serve as extremes, so that the characters can vary their beliefs in the middle of both

[@tokyorome]

This was fun to watch, thanks!

[@TheMightyKite]

Do you think that it would be wise to have Isu artifacts in the hands of children? Shay made a point that no one, including the Assassins should be messing with things beyond our understanding If everything is permitted, then you invite more chaos than freedom, you invite murder, war, deceit, etc. This is why I’ve always thought the Templars, especially during Haythem’s time as grandmaster, had the right mindset on how to help bring order to the world May the Father of Understanding guide us.

[@tnwhiskey68]

Unity is the best game!

[@zero-yb2rm]

I beg you record this when your not sick that was so gross to listen too

[@lucabrandao5243]

you problably didn't understand AC4 story, if you think you're only a pirate sailling

[@კრიტიკოსი-შ4ჯ]

These Templars remind me a lot about this Iluminati thing

[@MrGondor123]

Yeah thats why im for the assassins

[@კრიტიკოსი-შ4ჯ]

@@MrGondor123 yeah I also prefer the ideology and ways of the Assassins

[@neowrex9901]

Me too always with the assassin creed

[@კრიტიკოსი-შ4ჯ]

@@neowrex9901 Nothing is true everything is permitted

[@kaybevang536]

In real life the Freemasons and Illuminati are linked as the Successors Of The Templars

[@dynamic7351]

To sum it up, I think both sides are too extreme. The assassins strive for complete freedom but this results in anarchy and disorder. The templars strive for order and control but this can lead to oppression and abuse of power by the upper classes. Instead there must be somewhere where they both meet in the middle where there isn't too much of control or freedom. I would pick neither of them but if I had to I'd pick assasins only because templars are most shown to be the worst in the games.

[@kaybevang536]

This is like Metal Gear type stuff the Patriots desire control

[@JoeDirtisawsome]

no the assassins' dont advocate for anarchy or disorder. At the end of Revelations ezio says "To say that nothing is true is to realize that the foundations of society are fragile and that we must be the shepherds of our civilization. To say that everything is permitted is to understand that we are the architects of our actions, and that we must live with their consequences, whether glorious of tragic." - ezio auditore. This is crucial in my opinion to understand what the assassin's creed philosophy was, because you have the same misunderstanding that Edward had "To recognize that nothing is true and everything is permitted, that laws arise not from divinity but from reason, I understand now that our creed does not command us to be free, it commands us to be wise" altair "nothing is true everything is permitted" isn't do as you please, it isnt a blank check, its you and your creed are morally responsible for every action or inaction you make, you will have to deal with the consequences of your actions.

[@dynamic7351]

@@JoeDirtisawsome oh I deleted my original reply but i see what you mean now and I think I agree with it but I'll have to think about it.

[@assassinwolf2719]

I wouldn’t be surprise if there a third organization who are in the middle.

[@thatemocat]

There needs to be a middle ground. Order and Peace. A balance between the two. If not there is no true freedom of humanity.

[@JamesReborn2023]

Not even the assassins believe themselves to be “right” bc they believe nothing is true. After being saved by Christ, I went back to this game’s concepts and lessons from both orders and saw how twisting it can be. “Nothing is true, everything is permitted” is a lie straight from the devil.

[@friedrichmyers]

I think the story was at its peak at AC3 and later it was all downhill. I don't really like the hype for Black Flag or Unity. Rogue was a good game but it was shadowed by Unity.

[@voratittchunharuckchot9711]

The Templar are right that human need order, or else human will ultimately make bad decision when given freedom. However, the Templar themselves are human, and when they achieve absolute power and in total control over all the people - they can also make the bad decision as no one control them. The creed, on the other hand, while true, are very difficult to achieve peace with the way human currently are. In a way, both side have their freedom to pursue their ideologies however they see fit. The Templar are free to pursue peace through order and use piece of Eden to take away everyone's free will, and The Assassin are free to kill the Templar and sometime commit atrocity to oppose those plan to pursue peace through free will. Like Ezio said - we are responsible for our own action, whether glorious or tragic. I think both the assassin and templar exist by necessities. As long as human exist, both ideologies will exist - and so does the templar and assassin. I don't think their war will ever end, unless they can find common ground - which is near impossible given human nature. That is to say, human will never achieve true peace and both side are naive to believe that peace is possible.

[@alienus9092]

Neither is right. Truth is in balance.

[@Weezyfan0306]

We all gonna die bro

[@Yusufspider42]

Yes

[@longplaylegends]

Tbh, I don't think either are right or wrong, it's that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Actually, it's why I call myself a "conservatarian". I think that most people aught to be generally free to do what they want, but at some point, total freedom with no social cohesion to each other, means that one can justify anything for the sake of "freedom". I guess you can say that those freedoms must end where others' freedoms are impeded, but how and when? For example, what if it's true that say, open marijuana use does in fact chip away at the "morality" (or whatever you'd call it) and act as one little factor in descending a society into chaos? Maybe, legalized prostitution? The list can go on. I actually think people aught to be able to be free to make these decisions, but I wonder if the most sensible answer is to have social pressures against them generally speaking, leaving certain things to be niche and not spread to the rest of society..? Might be the general middle ground of some sort. They seem to simply be the two extremes of libertarians and authoritarians, which is very interesting.

[@TsukuyomiBeats]

I disagree I believe the assassins are right because you never know someone's true story and some chaos is needed to protect our rights rather than fake order that aims to understand how to control and be god when really they have no clue.

[@exile6688]

Alexander the Great was never a templar. Though Julius Caeser was, in fact, he is the Father of Understanding.

[@astralangel7772]

Then why did he attack the zoroastrians

[@exile6688]

@@astralangel7772 Alexander was just a normal dude who got his hands on a staff of eden.

[@exile6688]

@@astralangel7772 Also at that time in history the greek world saw persia as this land of barbareins and tyreny. zoroastrianisim was the state religon of Persia. Also the orgian of the Templars happended in the Persian Empire.

[@AkshatSTR8EDGE]

1:14 it was. Ac4 was a borefest.

[@Omarthedemigod]

Tbh I really like Unity and Black Flag, but I have to agree with you. Assassins vs Templars is what made the series. Black Flag really diverged from it in a way where it could have just been an original game and went 100% into pirate stuff instead of 80%. Unity really does bring it back into its roots before all the other ones happened. It’s why I say Desmond Miles is the overlooked soul of Assassins Creed. When he died, and the series continued, the main thread of Assassins Creed broke. Now we got Vikings, Roman’s and some Bri’ish people. I do like Syndicate tho.

[@garysanders7935]

Unity is by far my favorite

[@RekaYoLife]

You should for sure make more videos

[@dibi8600]

this video is abstergo sponsored

[@Mr.Grumps565]

Had problems but would rather play over the new crap