One of the most memorable moments in the entire Assassin's Creed series occurs near the start of Assassin's Creed 3, when Haytham Kenway has finished assembling his group of supposed assassins in the New World. At this point, players are led to believe they're following a group of assassins, as Haytham uses a hidden blade and exhibits the charisma reminiscent of previous protagonist Ezio Auditore. Up until this moment, Haytham has portrayed a heroic figure, liberating Native Americans from prisons and confronting British redcoats. However, the revelation comes when he utters the familiar Templar phrase, "May the Father of Understanding guide us," making it clear that we've been following the Templars, the sworn enemies of the Assassins.
To me, this surprising twist represents the pinnacle of Assassin's Creed's potential. The initial game in the series introduced an intriguing concept—find, get to know, and kill your targets—but it fell short in the story department, with both protagonist Altaïr and his victims lacking personality. Assassin's Creed 2 improved on this by introducing the more iconic Ezio, yet failed to give the same depth to his adversaries, such as the underdeveloped Cesare Borgia in the spinoff Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. It was only with Assassin's Creed 3, set during the American Revolution, that Ubisoft devoted equal effort to fleshing out both the hunted and the hunter. This approach created an organic flow from setup to payoff, striking a delicate balance between gameplay and narrative that has yet to be replicated in subsequent titles.
While the current RPG era of the series has been well-received by players and critics, numerous articles, YouTube videos, and forum posts suggest that Assassin's Creed is in decline. The reasons for this vary. Some argue that the increasingly unrealistic premises, such as battling gods like Anubis and Fenrir, are to blame. Others criticize Ubisoft's inclusion of varied romance options or the use of real-world historical figures like the African samurai Yasuke in Assassin's Creed Shadows. However, I believe the decline stems from the series' gradual abandonment of character-driven storytelling, which has become overshadowed by expansive sandbox elements.
Over the years, Assassin's Creed has expanded its original action-adventure formula with RPG and live service elements, including dialogue trees, XP-based leveling systems, loot boxes, microtransaction DLC, and gear customization. However, as these new installments have grown larger, they have begun to feel more empty, not just in terms of repetitive side missions but also in their storytelling.
While a game like Assassin's Creed Odyssey technically offers more content than Assassin's Creed 2, much of it feels wooden and underdeveloped. Theoretically, allowing players to choose their character's actions and dialogue should enhance immersion, but in practice, it often does the opposite. As scripts become longer to accommodate multiple scenarios, they lose the polish found in games with more focused narratives. The action-adventure era's tightly scripted stories allowed for sharply defined characters, not diluted by the demands of a game structure that requires the protagonist to shift between compassion and brutality based on player whims.
As a result, while Assassin's Creed Odyssey has more content than Assassin's Creed 2, much of it feels less engaging. This can break the immersion, making it evident that players are interacting with computer-generated characters rather than complex historical figures. In contrast, the Xbox 360/PS3 era produced some of gaming's finest writing, from Ezio's passionate speech, "Do not follow me, or anyone else!" after defeating Savonarola, to Haytham's tragicomic soliloquy when killed by his son, Connor:
"Don't think I have any intention of caressing your cheek and saying I was wrong. I will not weep and wonder what might have been. I'm sure you understand. Still, I'm proud of you in a way. You have shown great conviction. Strength. Courage. All noble qualities. I should have killed you long ago."
The writing has also suffered in other ways over the years. Modern games often simplify the narrative to a clear dichotomy of Assassins = good and Templars = bad, whereas earlier games blurred these lines. In Assassin's Creed 3, each defeated Templar challenges Connor's—and the player's—beliefs. William Johnson, a negotiator, suggests the Templars could have prevented the Native American genocide. Thomas Hickey, a hedonist, calls the Assassins' mission unrealistic and predicts Connor's unfulfillment. Benjamin Church, who betrays Haytham, claims it's "all a matter of perspective," highlighting the British view of themselves as victims rather than aggressors.
Haytham attempts to undermine Connor's faith in George Washington, arguing that the country he will create will be no less despotic than the monarchy the Americans sought to overthrow—an assertion validated when it's revealed that Washington, not Haytham's henchman Charles Lee, ordered the burning of Connor's village. By the end of the game, players are left with more questions than answers, making the story stronger.
Looking back on the franchise's history, the track "Ezio's Family" from the Jesper Kyd-composed Assassin's Creed 2 score resonated with players to become the series' official theme. The PS3 games, particularly Assassin's Creed 2 and Assassin's Creed 3, were fundamentally character-driven experiences. The melancholic guitar strings of "Ezio's Family" evoked Ezio's personal trauma of losing his family, not just the Renaissance setting. While I appreciate the expansive worldbuilding and graphical fidelity of the current generation of Assassin's Creed games, I hope the franchise will one day scale down to deliver the focused, tailor-made stories that initially captivated me. Unfortunately, in an industry dominated by sprawling sandboxes and single-player games with live service ambitions, such a return to form might not be considered "good business" anymore.
