The Instigator
Jotham
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
EAT_IT_SUKA
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Should assinssins creed have dog companions to fight for you in the game

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
EAT_IT_SUKA
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2015 Category: Games
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 442 times Debate No: 73720
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

Jotham

Pro

If ac should have dog companions in the game
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Hello, PRO. Your thesis is: 'The Assassin's Creed games should have dogs companions to fight for you in the game.' My thesis is: 'The Assassin's Creed games should not have dog companions to fight for you in the game.' Good luck. A 'dog' is defined as 'a domesticated carnivorous mammal that typically has a long snout, an acute sense of smell, and a barking, howling, or whining voice. It is widely kept as a pet or for work or field sports.' [1]. For the sake of simplicity, dogs in the Assassin's Creed games have the same habits and properties as real life dogs (eg: are typically memorable, attract lots of attention and have the same size and strength as dogs in the real world).

Contention 1) Dogs are Unable to Follow You Around Everywhere
Assassin's Creed games have a lot of climbing and jumping around.


P1) If you don't have thumbs, you cannot climb
P2) Dogs don't have thumbs
A1) Thus, dogs cannot climb

Why would dogs be in Assassin's Creed if they can't even do one of the most abundant actions in the game: climbing? The game also involves a lot of jumping onto a building, then climbing, then jumping onto a building, then climbing, etc. Even if a dog could climb onto something (eg: jumps onto boxes and then onto a roof), it would likely have to full-on climb something, which is impossible. Also, some dog just jumping around a city would attract lots of attention, which leads me to my next contention:

Contention 2) Dogs Attract Lots of Attention
While playing Assassin's Creed, you want to fly under the radar all the time, because, well, you are an assassin. By having some loud dog following you down the streets, you are attracting too much unwanted attention. Not to mention, if you are doing an assassination, your target is probably going to notice some guy walking around with a dog following him, ruining the assassination. That would provoke the guards, leading me to my next contention:


Contention 3) Dogs are Easy to Kill
Really, the guards have a lot of armor on:



Not to mention that they are armed. How many guards do you think a dog could take down? How many guards do you think it would take to kill a dog? Not many. Of course, the assassin could have multiple dogs...but that would attract even more attention, and they still couldn't follow the assassin.

Conclusion
Dogs, if they were your companions that would fight for you in Assassin's Creed, couldn't follow you, would attract lots of attention, just as dogs do in the present (really, would you ask to meet some random stranger on the street or a dog, and would you remember a dog or some random guy on the street?) and would easily be killed by the guards, thus we can decided them useless in the Assassin's Creed Games. Thank you.


Back to PRO.

Sources and Citations
[1]-https://www.google.ca...
Debate Round No. 1
Jotham

Pro

I could change the question to add eagles in the game to help disstract guards to sneak in areas. it helps the assinssins sneak their way into bulidings that are guarded by templar guards it could help from a bond with the assinssins brotherhood
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Yes, but the problem with that is that an eagle would only make a guard lift their head up. Do you think an eagle could get guards so distracted that they completely ignore their duty and watch some bird in the sky, missing an assassin sneaking in?

Because that resolution doesn't have many arguments, and frankly is quite bland, I don't accept the new resolution.
Debate Round No. 2
Jotham

Pro

Jotham forfeited this round.
EAT_IT_SUKA

Con

Extend arguments.

Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by CommunistDog 1 year ago
CommunistDog
Nice concept!
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
JothamEAT_IT_SUKATied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: No contest. Pro's only case, was firstly weak, second on a different resolution; whereas con had a strong and unrefuted case against dogs.
Vote Placed by Atheism_Debater 1 year ago
Atheism_Debater
JothamEAT_IT_SUKATied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: pro ff
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
JothamEAT_IT_SUKATied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture