Assassin’s Creed: The unofficial Al-Qaeda game


It has been the most awaited game of the year – Ubisoft’s “Assassin’s Creed”. The official plot deals about a member of the legendary assassins, an organization of … eh, yeah… assassins. Your mission as player is to kill nine different persons because they destabilize the peace of the hole Middle East with their actions. So far, so political correct.

256px-Assassin's_Creed

I say this is bullshit.

The historical assassins had been a bunch of fanatical and ideological blinded killers who dreamt of establishing a strict theocracy (think of Iran). This sounds very familiar with what islamic terrorists are doing these days, doesn’t it?

Just imagine a few changes:

– change of time: not the Middle Ages, but the present

– change of scenery: not Akkon or Jerusalem, but Bagdad or New York

– change of armament: not the dagger and poison, but AK-47 and explosive belts

– change of mission: not a hidden single killing, but casualties as many as possible

The rest remains the same.

What about escaping after the kill? Not historical. Assassins didn’t run away – they accepted their death and now you know where the modern suicide assassin is descendent from.

This is of course only a game, but with an interesting setup.

Jens Heymann

  1. #1 by shmeeed on December 28, 2007 - 04:04

    OMG, Assassin’s Creed is not historically correct!
    Let’s better tell the Department of Homeland Security about this subversive game and go back to playing America’s Army instead. SCNR πŸ˜‰

  2. #2 by Skahler on January 5, 2008 - 00:28

    psst..hey. read the disclaimer again. I think you missed something. If I’m not mistaken it does say FICTIONAL!!

  3. #3 by James on January 5, 2008 - 11:32

    The two before me have nailed home the point that the game is not historically correct or even based on real incidents (comparisons to reputed assassinations during that time aside) so I’ll take a different route.
    By changing the time, scenery, armament, and missions, you change essentially EVERTHING about the game.
    Take the same idea and apply it to the civil war era and you have a training game for the Lincoln assassination. Take it to the 60s and it’s the Kennedy assassination.
    This can go on and on for any assassination(s) or mass murder in history – and that’s only with “the rest remain[ing] the same.”
    The fact is, comparing something like Assassin’s Creed to the terrorist activities of today by changing everything about the game to make it fit the world of today doesn’t really make sense.

  4. #4 by Lindsay on January 27, 2008 - 01:54

    Jens, I think you may be a little confused. Assassins did not hang around to die. They killed and crept away, in order to accept their next job and kill again. You appear to be confusing assassins with suicide killers, or bombers. Those who attack with the express intent of dying whilst taking as many of the “enemy” with them as possible.

    Assassins, like most professionals, were respected (though not liked) and feared. They received recompense for their work. Why would they kill themselves in the process? There is not profit in that.

    Sun Tzu recommended assassination an awful long time ago as a way to ensure that the common soldier never had to fight. Sounds like a good idea…

  5. #5 by Venom on February 18, 2008 - 22:12

    Lindsay, you may check your sources. Many assassins in fact died, because they only could do their job in expense of their own life. Often the target person couldn’t be catched unguarded; your only chance was a stab out of nowhere in fully knowlegde of the deadly consequences. So there is no clear distinction possible between an assassin and a suicide killer.

    But of course they didn’t kill themselves. If they got away healthy, the better. But no guarantee for that. And they knew it.

Comments are closed.