Assassin’s Creed Shadows sidesteps the Templar war—Ubisoft teases a modern-day comeback

Assassin’s Creed’s core conflict took a back seat in Shadows-now Ubisoft says it’s coming back

Assassin’s Creed Shadows is the long-requested Japan entry fans have been begging for, but it also continues Ubisoft’s recent habit of sidelining the franchise’s central myth-Assassins vs. Templars and the modern-day meta plot. That caught my attention because, as someone who’s played since Altair and lived through the Desmond years, the series’ secret sauce was always the way those two timelines bounced off each other. A Ubisoft level designer, Luc Plante, just suggested that absence might be temporary, teasing a deeper dive into the conflict and a renewed emphasis on the present day.

• The Templar-Assassin conflict is “still a pillar,” with a “more in-depth look… soon,” according to level designer Luc Plante.
• Shadows intentionally prioritized its dual protagonists’ personal stories over the meta plot.
• Ubisoft hints the modern era will be spotlighted “at some point,” raising questions about where that story will live.
• Critical Role’s tie-in is cited, but transmedia isn’t a substitute for in-game narrative.

Breaking down the comments

Plante, responding to questions on Reddit (surfaced by PC Gamer), framed Shadows as a character-first entry: “The conflict between Assassins and Templars has always been a pillar of Assassin’s Creed. With Shadows, we wanted to position our protagonists in this universe before developing the conflict. Now that this is done in the main game, we have scratched the surface with the addition of the story led by Critical Role, and you can expect a more in-depth look at this conflict soon.” He also nodded to the modern timeline: “Although the modern era is not the main focus of the story we are telling with Shadows, it remains important for our community, so you can expect it to be highlighted at some point, in one way or another…”

The devs are basically saying, “We’ll get there.” That’s fair-Shadows introduces two leads (Naoe and Yasuke) and a new cultural lens. But name-dropping Critical Role as “scratching the surface” muddies the waters. Yes, the tabletop collective ran a special one-shot in the Shadows universe, which is cool marketing, but lore shouldn’t be outsourced if the goal is to re-center the core conflict. Gamers shouldn’t have to chase streams to understand where the meta story is headed.

Context: How we got here

The franchise used to treat modern-day beats as the spine of the series—Desmond’s arc tied together AC1 through AC3, messy as it got. After that, Ubisoft pulled back: Black Flag turned the present day into a light ARG; Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla experimented with Layla but kept it sparse; Mirage deliberately went “classic” and minimized the present. Shadows arguably goes further by focusing almost entirely on personal stories in the Sengoku setting. None of that is inherently bad—the historical playgrounds are still the main course—but Assassin’s Creed without a meaningful Templar-Assassin struggle risks becoming a stylish period anthology rather than a saga.

It also feeds a growing split in the community. Some players love the clean, character-driven approach; others feel the series lost its identity when it stopped weaving the ancient fight and sci-fi weirdness through every release. Ubisoft’s statements suggest they’ve heard that feedback. The open question is where and how they deliver the payoff.

What this actually means for players

If you’re buying Shadows for a big modern-day reveal, temper expectations. The base game puts almost all its chips on Naoe and Yasuke, and it’s good at it. Plante’s comments read like a promise that the Templar-Assassin feud and the present day are due for a comeback—just not squarely inside Shadows’ campaign. That could mean DLC, a narrative update, or the next mainline entry. Ubisoft has been building a hub-like approach to the brand for years; a centralized platform that ties multiple stories together would be a logical place to re-thread the meta plot across releases.

The big caution flag: gating meaningful lore behind paid DLC or external media would be a miss. Assassin’s Creed has always worked best when the connective tissue is playable and accessible. If the “more in-depth look” arrives as a side story you can only watch, it won’t fix the feeling that the core conflict was de-prioritized.

On the flip side, saving the heavy Templar–Assassin lifts for a follow-up could be smart. Let Shadows breathe as a character piece, then swing back with a modern-day thread that actually matters—something with stakes, not just audio logs and emails. Think fewer collectibles, more decisions that echo across eras. The series needs a clear thesis again: What does the Brotherhood stand for in 2025? What do Templars want beyond “order”? Put those questions on-screen with consequences.

The gamer’s take

I’m glad Ubisoft is acknowledging the gap. Shadows nails atmosphere and stealth vibes, but I miss the “why” behind the stabbing. If the team truly plans to refocus on the conflict and the present day, great—give us plotlines that evolve across games, not just crossovers and codex entries. And if the modern timeline is coming back, make it playable, not a cutscene wrapper. The community has been patient; it’s time for a confident, cohesive arc again.

TL;DR

Ubisoft says the Templar–Assassin war and the modern-day story aren’t dead—Shadows just chose to focus on its protagonists first. Expect a deeper dive “soon,” but don’t count on the base game to deliver it. If the meta plot returns in a meaningful, playable way, Assassin’s Creed could find its identity again.