Why Assassin's Creed 2 and 3 Had the Best Writing the Series Has Ever Seen

One of the most unforgettable moments in the entire Assassin’s Creed series unfolds near the beginning of Assassin’s Creed 3, when Haytham Kenway completes his mission to gather a group of assassins in the New World. At least, that's what players are led to believe initially. Haytham, equipped with a hidden blade and displaying the same charisma as the beloved protagonist Ezio Auditore, has until this point been portrayed as a hero, liberating Native Americans from captivity and confronting arrogant British redcoats. It's only when he recites the well-known Templar phrase, "May the Father of Understanding guide us," that the true nature of his allegiance is revealed – we've been following the Templars, the sworn enemies of the Assassins.

This twist is a testament to the full potential of the Assassin’s Creed narrative. The inaugural game in the series introduced a compelling concept—identify, understand, and eliminate your targets—but fell short in crafting engaging stories, with both protagonist Altaïr and his victims lacking depth. Assassin’s Creed 2 marked progress by introducing the more iconic Ezio, yet failed to develop its antagonists with the same care, as evidenced by the underdeveloped Cesare Borgia in Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood. It was not until Assassin’s Creed 3, set during the American Revolution, that Ubisoft devoted equal attention to the development of both the hunted and the hunter. This approach created a seamless narrative flow from setup to resolution, achieving a delicate balance between gameplay and story that has yet to be matched in subsequent titles.

Although the current RPG-focused era of Assassin’s Creed has been generally well-received, there is a consensus among players, critics, and online communities that the series has been in decline. Theories about the reasons for this vary. Some criticize the increasingly fantastical elements, such as battling mythical beings like Anubis and Fenrir. Others question the inclusion of diverse romance options or the decision in Assassin’s Creed Shadows to feature a historical figure like the African samurai Yasuke as a protagonist. However, I believe the root of the decline lies elsewhere—in the series' gradual shift away from character-driven storytelling, which has been overshadowed by the expansive sandbox worlds of recent games.

Over time, Assassin’s Creed has evolved from its original action-adventure roots to incorporate RPG and live-service elements, including dialogue trees, XP-based leveling systems, loot boxes, microtransaction-driven DLC, and gear customization. As the games have grown larger, they've also started to feel more hollow, not only due to repetitive side-missions but also in their storytelling approach.

While a game like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey offers more content than its predecessor, Assassin’s Creed 2, much of it feels superficial and underdeveloped. The inclusion of player choice in dialogue and actions should enhance immersion, but in practice, it often dilutes the narrative. Lengthier scripts designed to accommodate various scenarios tend to lack the polish of more focused narratives. The action-adventure era's tight, screenplay-like scripts allowed for well-defined characters, unaffected by the need to cater to multiple player choices.

Consequently, while Assassin’s Creed Odyssey technically contains more content than Assassin’s Creed 2, much of it comes across as wooden and undercooked. This diminishes immersion, making it evident that players are interacting with scripted characters rather than living, breathing historical figures. This contrasts sharply with the Xbox 360/PS3 era, which I believe delivered some of the best writing in gaming. From Ezio's passionate "Do not follow me, or anyone else!" speech after defeating Savonarola to the tragicomic monologue delivered by Haytham upon his death at the hands of 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 quality has declined in other ways as well. Recent games tend to simplify the narrative into a clear-cut dichotomy of Assassins as heroes and Templars as villains, whereas earlier titles explored the blurred lines between the two factions. In Assassin’s Creed 3, each Templar's final words challenge Connor's—and by extension, the player's—beliefs. William Johnson suggests that the Templars could have prevented the Native American genocide. Thomas Hickey questions the feasibility of the Assassins' mission, while Benjamin Church argues that perspective alters everything, with the British viewing themselves as victims rather than aggressors.

Haytham himself undermines Connor’s trust in George Washington, asserting that the new nation he would build would be just as oppressive as the monarchy it replaced—a claim validated when it's revealed that the order to burn Connor's village came from Washington, not Charles Lee. By the end of the game, players are left with more questions than answers, which strengthens the narrative.

Reflecting on the franchise's history, it's clear why the track "Ezio's Family" from the Assassin’s Creed 2 soundtrack, composed by Jesper Kyd, became the series' theme. The PS3-era games, particularly Assassin’s Creed 2 and Assassin’s Creed 3, were fundamentally character-driven. The melancholic guitar strings of "Ezio's Family" were meant to evoke Ezio's personal loss rather than the game's Renaissance setting. While I appreciate the expansive worlds and graphical improvements of the current Assassin’s Creed titles, I hope the series will return to its roots with focused, character-centric stories that originally captivated me. However, in today's market dominated by expansive sandboxes and live-service ambitions, such a return to form might not align with "good business" practices.