History, narratives, and video games: Assassin's Creed III needs to be careful how it changes history

By Joey McMurry

Role-playing games are becoming more and more popular every year.

As technology expands, developers are able to create much larger and complex environments for players to immerse themselves in. The Assassin's Creed series is one such game that has set the tone for this ever-evolving branch of the video game industry.

In this iteration of the series, players will not be thrown into the typical medieval setting they are used to. Instead, they will take part in perhaps the most important conflict in American history - the American Revolution.

Games that integrate history are always interesting and often fun to play. Players identify with the stories if they are involved in their own history.


Take, for example, the latest Treyarch iteration of the Call of Duty franchise. In Black Ops, players are thrust into multiple conflicts in American history. This interweaving of fiction and history create a very compelling storyline that climaxes with ***SPOILER ALERT*** the subtle claim that the player's character is actually responsible for the JFK assassination.

That is exceptional storytelling because it relates to the player's past while creating an entirely new story. Although it is fiction (or is it? :P), the historical value creates a more compelling narrative.

Assassin's Creed III is the latest game that will venture to incorporate history into a new narrative, and the developers may set a new standard  because of how complex they can make the narrative and historical setting.

For those who don't know much about the franchise, it is a role-playing game where players take control of different descendents of a lineage of assassins. In previous games, the setting was in medieval times. The overarching narrative, which now spans multiple games, now shifts to a fairly recent conflict on American shores.

No other major gaming franchise has taken a shot at the American Revolution. World War II and modern conflicts have been common settings in the industry over the last 15 years, but conflicts like the American Revolution have been left to the history books.

With Assassin's Creed now trying to enter that setting, the developers and writers need to be careful how they approach the storyline and how they integrate history. Since no other franchise has ever used the American Revolution before, players, fans, and reviewers will be far more critical of the storyline. This is simply because there is no other basis for comparison and the franchise's integration of history will set the bar for what is an acceptable bending of historical records.

Cover story in the April 2012 edition of GameInformer Magazine.
Can players kill George Washington in Assassin's Creed III?

As long as the game stays fictitious, the writers should be allowed to have their fun with history. They simply must be careful if their storyline integrates a major player in the American Revolution as a villain. If that were to happen, there would be some very unhappy historians and general Americans.

That being said, the story should still be exceptionally interesting. The Assassin's Creed franchise is known for having a spectacular narrative to go with the gameplay, so that shouldn't change. As long as the writers don't mess with history too much by portraying one of the heroes of the revolution in a negative light, the narrative should be a lot of fun to play though, especially with how complex it can be.

The revolution makes for a very intriguing setting, so it should be exciting to see the overarching narrative of all the Assassin's Creed games continue along with the new narrative incorporating the history of the United States.