Assassin's Creed- Forsaken: A review.

During the month of October, I found this lovely little book in a bookstore, along with a few others of its series.

Assassin's Creed: Forsaken. 

The name "Assassin's Creed" is quite well known these days, whether you've played it, or just heard someone muttering about the numerous glitches in some of their games.
This is my review of this book, based on the game, Assassin's Creed 3. 

Let me know what you think, where I can improve my writing, and whether you would consider buying the book yourself. :)

A bit of back story: 

Ubisoft is well known for its Assassin’s Creed franchise which it began in November of 2007, with its self-titled game. Since then, it has gone on to produce 11 titles in its main series, and 21 games overall, spread across a myriad of consoles and hand held devices, in the span of just over a decade.

                The series’ premise revolves around the rivalry and conflict between two ancient secret societies, of whose modern day incarnations are known as “The Knights Templar”, and the “Order of Assassins”. The first game began with a protagonist, named Desmond Miles, being captured by the Templars, as they try and wrest from him his genetic memories, of the assassins in his bloodline.

                The first game started with the original Assassin’s order from which the assassins got their names from in real history, through the Italian renaissance and up till the American Revolution and the French Revolution. The next stop in the series was a trip to Victorian England, following which, they started moving back further back into history.

                But the focus for this review is Assassin’s Creed 3, the one which focused on the American Revolution, specifically between the years 1754 to 1783. But before delving into that, a bit, and getting to the actual review of the book, there are a few key things which must be mentioned.

                The Assassins vs. Templars conflict. In the first game, the conflict is portrayed in a pretty cut and dry format, where you have the protagonist on the “good” side and the other side being “bad”, without a clear antagonist being present, or rather, one that varies from game to game. Instead of keeping it straight laced and one dimensional, they add more to the story, and we learn about the motivations behind both groups:  The Templars are fighting for absolute control, and controlling the minds and wills of all the people under them, to usher in a rule without argument, conflict, or violence, but also without independence. On the other side, you have the brotherhood of Assassins, who wish that freedom be given to every man, woman and child, regardless of the consequences, so that people may make their own choices, and learn from them.

                Now, why is this important? Throughout the first few games, we see pieces, here and there wherein the black and white of this world of Assassins and Templars becomes grey in parts. In real life, we know what Assassins are, and it seems strange that they are the ones who go about securing freedom for the oppressed.

                But this seems to stem from a necessity to be different from the antagonists, the Templars, who were a real world catholic military order, who, in game, were more inclined towards the subjugation of humans, even if it was borne out of a hope to quench conflict and violence before it grew in the first place.

                So where do we see them being redeemed in the eyes of the player? We return to Assassin’s Creed 3, where we start seeing the grey far more than had been shown in the past, and it isn’t till 2014 with Assassin’s Creed Rogue that we see things from the Templar perspective that we briefly saw in Assassin’s Creed 3.

                Assassin’s Creed 3 and Assassin’s Creed Rogue had an overlap in their in game years, from 1754 to 1776, during the colonial era of North America, where the players were able to delve into the going on of the time, when America was attempting its revolution.

                From the first game, we take a look into history through the eyes of the protagonist’s ancestors. During Assassin’s Creed 3, we look at the world of colonial America through the eyes of two ancestors, Haytham Kenway, and his son, Ratonhnhaké:ton (also called Connor Kenway).

                This game had a lot of unusual developments, which were not seen in prior games, or in games since. This game marked the end of the story of a protagonist, namely Desmond Miles, as well as the first look at the world through the eyes of the Templars, by playing as Haytham Kenway.

                The game also has a more “modern” storyline, set in the year 2018, which dealt with a lot of lore created inside the franchise, where you play as Desmond Miles. The game is able to do a pretty good job of following the two stories, of Connor, and Desmond, quite well, shifting between them as needed.

                The book, however, doesn’t include the “modern” storyline, and instead deals with the events of the life of Haytham Kenway. Haytham, in the game, was introduced and used only up till the end of the prologue of the game (albeit, a very lengthy one), and was only seen in rare instances.

                Which is fine, were it not for the fact that Haytham is presented as a very unique character in the family tree of Desmond Miles. He is the only known Templar of the bloodline, comprising mostly of only assassins. His father, an Assassin, but also a Pirate from the golden age of piracy (whom you get to play as in Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag), played a key role in the development of Haytham kenway, but we aren’t to know that as the game featuring his father isn’t released till the next year. The players instead get to see the world mostly through the eyes of his son, who, it seems, is unaware of his entire heritage and bloodline till much later in his life.

                The book, Assassin’s Creed: Forsaken, is seen through Haytham’s eyes, and in doing so, we are able to glimpse the life of someone who was born to an Assassin, and then grows up a Templar. With Haytham, we can see a conflict of ideologies between what the Templars and Assassins teach.

                The most important aspect of this book is that it is able to take someone who is considered as an antagonist, or someone from the antagonist’s side, and make them someone who can be understood, in a way superior to the original source. It becomes a case of “movie vs. book” but in this case, the book came second.

                Talking about the overall story of the colonial period, one would assume that since the two opposing forces of the revolution were the British and Colonial Americans, that the Templars would pick one side, while the Assassins would pick the other. However, with Haytham and Connor, you don’t see that as much, and on few enough occasions, they end up working together for the same goal (albeit, for different reasons).

                Point is, Assassin’s Creed: Forsaken provides a good story, which is told in the form of Journal entries from Haytham Kenway, with an epilogue/afterword written by his son. It provides a fresh look at the conflicts between these two groups, and adds to make the lines between their methods grey, while maintaining true to the characters. To someone who has played the game, it provides a lot of important details, such as seeing the world from the other side.

                There are a few points which need to be mentioned, however. The original game released in 2012, to coincide with the December 21^st “end of days” to play tie in with the “modern day” storyline, and the next instalment in the series, Assassin’s Creed 4: Black Flag, released the next year, with characters from before the in-game story.  The following year, Assassin’s Creed: Rogue was released, which added so much more to the conflict between Templars and Assassins, with the character you play as being an assassin turned Templar. The problem? It also added a lot to the story of Haytham. The problem with that? The book was released in 2012, the year the game launched. The period of time in which you see Rogue’s events take place are missing from the book. This adds some inconsistencies such as the lack of a mention of the conflict between the Templars and the Assassins, prior to the entry of Connor as a colonial Assassin, or even how Haytham knows the name of the leader of the Assassins, Achilles, which was never explained in the book.

As someone who has played the game first, you do miss a lot of the story that is Connor, including the path to becoming an assassin. For this reason, its probably a better idea to both read and play the game, for a better experience overall, however it is not necessary to do so. 

Considering the added story of the life of Haytham Kenway before he came to America, and before the events of playing as an adult Connor, players feel disappointed, at the missed opportunity to play the events described in the book. One cannot fault Ubisoft for not adding this, as they were pushing to make one main title game per year, but one cannot also help but feel cheated either.

Haytham, as well as the protagonist of Assassin’s Creed: Rogue, Shay Cormac, while both Templars, had their roots in Assassin’s ideology, did not want to outright control the people for personal gain and power, but in an attempt to benefit the whole of humanity. Questioning his faith in the teachings of the Templar order, especially considering the life of betrayal he had to deal with as he grew up, the readers are able to see the “grey” side to things once more.

                Unlike previous depictions of Templars, Haytham stands out as one who is more focused on the betterment of people, without exploitation, and without harm. Shay Cormac, on the other hand, stayed with the Templars out of a necessity to prevent Assassins from unleashing dangers which they could not control. This contrast between the previous generations of Templars (and most future versions as well) has not been seen since in all media, except maybe in Sofia Rikkin from the Assassin’s Creed Movie.

                The book was incredibly well made, and told an amazing story, despite suffering from inconsistencies caused by retconning and anachronisms. The background for the character is properly fleshed out, and pulls no punches when telling his story. Though he may have Assassin roots, and an Assassin son, it doesn’t deter Haytham’s way of running the Templar Order.

                There are instances which differ from the game, but these are minor changes, which add more to the story than not. The perspective that the readers are provided, is great at adding a new dimension to the overall story, however, it also doesn’t draw sufficient attention to the overall “modern” storyline which would have been present had we seen parts of the story also through the eyes of Connor.

                It is something that I would recommend to people, even if they haven’t played the Assassin’s creed games, and especially to people who enjoy adventure and historic genres of books.