Assassin's Creed Subreddit threatens bans to anyone who complains about 'historical accurate'. Yasuke: 'We're all tired of this tedious discussion'

Scholars of the 16th century are interested in whether or not Yasuke was "really" a samurai. The answer depends on how the historical records about his life match up with the use of the word "samurai". Thomas Lockley has stated that Yasuke, an African man who briefly served feudal lord Oda Nobunaga in 16th-century Japan, was indeed a samurai. The title simply refers to warriors serving a lord.

When Yasuke, one of the two protagonists of the upcoming Assassin's Creed Shadows was revealed, however, a samurai-ness inquisition was launched, not by scholars but by onlookers, who declared it unacceptable for a Black man to headline a historical fiction set in Japan. There were many complaints about "historical inaccuracy", "forced diversity", and other issues.

As of this week, moderators on the unofficial Assassin’s Creed subreddit have had enough of it (thanks to GamesRadar).

The mods wrote in a closed thread that "with the reveal of Assassin's Creed Shadows there has been a flood of individuals spilling over into various online communities such as this subreddit, and raising arguments about 'historical authenticity'." "We are all tired of this endless discussion that has been talked to death. Not to mention, exacerbated by the recent official statement from Ubisoft. We would like to remind those participating in these discussions as to what this franchise entails and why there was no point to these debates to begin with other than thinly veiled bad faith intentions."

Ubisoft apologized for causing "concern in the Japanese community" with details in Shadows promotional material. This could be due to Ubisoft using a real-life group's flag, or a possible error in the placement of the torii gate. Ubisoft acknowledged the fact that Yasuke's samurai status is "a matter of debate and discussions" and that the other leading character, Naoe is a "Japanese Shinobi."

The subreddit moderators make a good point in their post that many saw Ubisoft’s statement as an acknowledgement of mostly bad-faith complaints, which never reflected a genuine concern about accurate cultural representation or integrity of the historical record. (The Assassin’s Creed series is about using "genetic memories" to relive a never-ending war between secret societies. In Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey, you fight Medusa.

The mods continue.

"Assassin's Creed" is historical fiction. This means that, while certain locations, figures, and events may be based in reality and even have a slight emphasis on accuracy, they are largely exaggerated to make the videogame more enjoyable. Yasuke is the first fictional player protagonist. While our other characters have all been fictional, some people may think that the rule above does not apply. It still does. Yasuke may not have played the same role in Shadows as he does on the show. It's okay. It's a videogame. It is not intended to be used as a sourcebook to gain actual historical knowledge. Instead, it is meant to inspire you to conduct your own research after experiencing a glimpse of authenticity.

"...We're not here to debate historical records. As fans, we understand that while these games give us a glimpse into how historical settings might have felt and allow us to compare them with actual records, we don't chase accuracy in this franchise. We play for other purposes. If you're here to express your displeasure with Yasuke or other inaccurate details in Ubisoft’s depiction Feudal Japan it's time to realize that this isn't the place to discuss this. Feel free to vent your frustrations elsewhere, away this franchise and its communities."

The post ends with a warning that "further remarks attempting to dispute Yasuke’s societal standing, disparage his inclusion into game or containing comments bordering on concern trolling regarding historical accuracy will be removed and met with ban."