Whether Yasuke, an African man who briefly served Oda Nobunaga in 16th century Japan, was "truly a samurai" is a somewhat interesting question for researchers of the time. Biographer Thomas Lockley, for one example, states that Yasuke was indeed one of Nobunaga's many samurai, and that the title simply refers to a samurai in the service of his lord (see Smithsonian article).

However, when it was revealed that Yasuke was one of the two main characters in Assassin's Creed Shadows, an inquisition was launched against him as a samurai, not by scholars, but by onlookers who argued that a black man should not be allowed to be the main character in a historical novel set in Japan. Complaints about "historical inaccuracies" and "forced diversity" abounded.

As of this week, the moderators of the unofficial Assassin's Creed subreddit have heard about it (thanks, GamesRadar).

"With the release of Assassin's Creed Shadows, certain individuals have been pouring into various communities online, such as this subreddit, raising discussions about 'historical accuracy,'" the moderators wrote in the now-closed thread." Needless to say, made worse by Ubisoft's recent official statement, we're sick and tired of this tedious debate about what the hell this franchise means and why there was never any meaning to these discussions from the beginning other than sheer malice. I would like to give a final cautionary note to those who are involved."

The Ubisoft statement referred to in this text is generally about details in previous "Shadow" promotional materials, such as Ubisoft's use of the flag of a real reenactment group and potential errors regarding the placement of the torii gate, which "raised concerns within the Japanese community" in general. An apology posted by the developer for causing Regarding Yasuke, Ubisoft acknowledged that his status as a samurai was "open to debate and discussion" and emphasized that the other main character, Naoe, was a "Japanese shinobi."

As the subreddit mods noted in their post, many saw Ubisoft's statement as a counterproductive admission of an almost malicious complaint that never involved accurate cultural representation or a genuine concern for the integrity of the historical record in the first place. (After all, the "Assassin's Creed" games use "genetic memory" to relive the endless wars between secret societies, and in "Assassin's Creed Odyssey" you fight Medusa.)

The mod continues: ["Assassin's Creed" is historical fiction. This means that certain places, events, and characters may be based on reality, with some emphasis on accuracy, but their depiction is largely exaggerated in the interest of a more enjoyable video game. All of the main characters have been fictional, but with the introduction of Yasuke, some people have mistakenly believed that the above rules do not apply. They still do. Yasuke is a samurai, as confirmed by several credible historians around the world, including in Japan, but he may not play as large a role in the real world as he does in "Shadow." This is fine. This is a video game. It is not intended to use "Assassin's Creed" as a sourcebook for actual historical knowledge.

"...... We are not in this community to discuss historical records. Most of us understand as fans that while these games provide a great insight into what the historical setting was like and provide a fun comparison to the actual record, we are not chasing accuracy in this franchise and play it primarily for other reasons We are not. So, if you are here to leave comments specifically complaining about Yasuke's appearance and the inaccurate details pointed out about Ubisoft's depiction of feudal Japan, this is not the place for such a discussion and never will be! . Please feel free to air your grievances away from this franchise and its community."

The post concludes with a warning that "Comments that dispute Yasuke's social status, slander Yasuke in the game, or contain statements that border on trolling concerns about historical accuracy will be promptly deleted and subject to ban."