That's actually what bother me the most about Forsaken.
Haytham was supposed to be, in the words of Ubisoft, "a dark James Bond" which is exactly what we were presented with in the game. In the book however, it was more like he was just raised that way and that's how he was going to stay no matter what because be didn't know any different.
He makes a better character going by the defecting to the Templars standard because he chose to be a Templar. He chose it because he believed more strongly in the Templar beliefs and not the Assassins which he was raised on. That way he has an idea of both sides and not just a one-sided ideal. It is also better that way because then we can infer that he obviously argued with his father about their ideals and beliefs just like Haytham does with his own son. Which in turn can be paralleled vaguely with Desmond and his father.
I do see your side, and it does make for a good AU I suppose, but it definitely shouldn't be canon...but then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Re: OP here.
Haytham was supposed to be, in the words of Ubisoft, "a dark James Bond" which is exactly what we were presented with in the game. In the book however, it was more like he was just raised that way and that's how he was going to stay no matter what because be didn't know any different.
He makes a better character going by the defecting to the Templars standard because he chose to be a Templar. He chose it because he believed more strongly in the Templar beliefs and not the Assassins which he was raised on. That way he has an idea of both sides and not just a one-sided ideal. It is also better that way because then we can infer that he obviously argued with his father about their ideals and beliefs just like Haytham does with his own son. Which in turn can be paralleled vaguely with Desmond and his father.
I do see your side, and it does make for a good AU I suppose, but it definitely shouldn't be canon...but then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.