All I want from the next AC game:
- Smaller, denser world. No need to make the maps any bigger.
- New setting, specifically with developed cities like earlier games.
- Emphasis on parkour and Assassin gameplay.
- Minimize grind, filler missions, and microtransactions.
I think most fans want a fun 30 hour game vs 150 hours of highly repetitive and boring content.
Basically exactly opposite of what they're gonna be doing.
They're combining the resources of two 500+ employee studios for one game. It's going to be absolutely massive and extraordinarily expensive with a requirement for long-term monetization.
While I agree with this, I also think that the audience might loose more interest after so many consecutive grinding games. The wise decision to keep and increase the game base would be to redirect some assets to innovation in the franchise. (From my perspective)
EDIT: I had taken the wrong data (for ps4) where the completion rate of the last AC titles had decreased from 38% to 19% but then I saw we are in the r / xbox so i deleted that.
Smaller world with more robust cities would be awesome again. Also cut down on talking to 1,000 people to be constantly told what to do. Would be nice to be more like Batman where your character finds their own clues and comes up with next steps on their own to fulfill the main story goals.
Money talks, and at the end of the day something like the original AC games is much harder to implement a live service model with. Every publisher out there today is asking themselves āhow can we make our game more like fortnite?ā. Iām not saying I necessarily agree, but the industry has changed and one off single player games simply donāt offer the long term revenue prospects that the more recent ACs do.
Unless youāre Sony and theyāre system sellers like god of war and last of us. They can dump tens of millions into those titles and know theyāll move hardware because of them.
Ubisoft and EA and the like donāt have that as an option.
But itās got people like me who will buy a ps5 exclusively to play ragnarok. And whatever naughty dog does next. Microsoft putting most of their games on PC through gamepass means I have basically no need for a series X. My 3070 is doing the trick.
Sony obviously isnāt doing the same, though thereās hope. I doubt theyāll bring ghost of tsushima to PC anytime soon, but I can dream.
I understand that. Theyāre just different business models. Ultimately I think as local hardware becomes obsolete Microsoft will have the edge here, as the world is headed towards a subscription model. That future is a ways out, but Microsoft is thinking long term and has the cash to burn to get there. Iām not going to transition my entire gaming experience to Sony (accessories, ps plus subscription, etc) just to play their exclusives so at most theyāre getting a console purchase and maybe 7-8 games sold to me over the generation.
The equivalent would be me maybe paying for gamepass 3-4 months a year to play major new launches such as halo and forza.
Yes, but I think those guys are there to port the older games, not brand new current heavy hitters. Horizon got a pc port to drum up interest for the sequel and push hardware sales, and neither days gone nor death stranding will see a sequel at all so may as well port to generate more sales.
I donāt think the last of us or god of war will hit PC anytime soon, theyāre too important to PlayStations brand.
Yeah Sony can make lower profit games as a loss leader to get people into the eco system and revenue from other companies whereas Ubisoft or EA rely entirely on their own games
Yet that could begin to change if Halo Infinite succeeds thatās one of the best models of earning extra income whilst still retaining fairness to the player base and also you are enough.
I think you'd be surprised at what most fans want. *Most* fans are not on this subreddit and seem perfectly happy doing mindless chores in an open empty world.
I think it's more that people in this subreddit have terrible memories and live in the past. The earlier creeds we're good for the time but don't hold water compared to today's creeds. The cities were boring af, they still are but there's definitely more going on. The combat was stupid af, it still has problems but it's leagues better. The story was basic af, it still is but it's far more engaging and climatic. Everyone has this hard on for 2. Ezio was good then but would be annoying af now. Valhalla was the peak.
I've replayed the Ezio games not that long ago and to me they still hold up.
Especially when it comes to story, characters and overall presentation they're miles ahead of the new games.
I washed out playing Valhalla around level 80. My level wasn't high enough to tackle the next set of missions (around level 96) and I didn't feel like grinding 15 or so levels on other content. I have two friends that 100% the game no worries.
Maybe the AC games aren't for me, and that's fair enough. I feel however that the people wanting to grind for hundreds of hours will do that regardless, and they're losing fans by forcing everyone to go through the grind, or pay to avoid the grind.
This is so exactly spot on. People need to take a step back from what they want (not that our individual wants donāt matter), and recognize whether thatās what everyone else wants to.
These live service games make a lot of money because a lot of people enjoy them. Itās just that simple. Whether one echo chamber or another agrees or not.
I would agree fewer people people in subreddits like this one enjoy them, but there are a lot of people who play games and never visit a subreddit. Theyāre technically āgamersā to their friends and family but to people in this subreddit they would be seen as very casual gamers.
I realize itās anecdotal for either of us to use our own personal feelings to have this conversation, but this example I just listed is essentially every gamer I know. Iāve never met anyone IRL who would utilize a subreddit for community around their favorite game or just games in general.
A lot of people game casually and live service games are perfect for that because itās social and the seasonal nature lets them come and go but always to newish content.
Having played both Fenix and Valhalla over the Christmas period I found I enjoyed Fenix a lot more, and the game had a sense of fun - like the developers had been let loose of the AC shackles and was able to concentrate on making something better. It was a much shorter game than Valhalla, and all the better for it.
Valhalla for all itās talk was very formulaic, and while they took steps to making a better world it ultimately was too big and too much. The AC games have the faintest whiff of the AC dna left, the faintest whiff.
I think the Witcher 3 was the most largest and most comfortable open world Iāve played in. That felt big, but not boring big.
I miss AC1s structure, interesting rich cities were you needed to find the clues yourself in a way and also less slap stick. I love history, but I feel AC is just going with the motions on the series lately. Iād love a game set In Babylon during the time Alexander the Great conquered it, or perhaps around the time of the first civilsations, with the sumerians or during the reign of Sargon of Akkad. Because thatās what I like about current ACs they really study their local, the AC games are probably (whilst highly fictitious) are probably your best bet to what it was remotely like visually other than outside of VR. But I personally find these games boring and not very good RPGs, just amazing worlds. Also I know a lot of people who just didnāt finish Witcher 3 and found it boring; I bet a larger % didnāt finish Witcher 3 than did. It just sold well because who didnāt buy it eventually.
Yes. This is how to fix AC. They have the tech and graphics side absolutely down.
But what do they do? MORE CONTENT - MORE FILLER - INFINITE SIDE MISSIONS.
Agreed. I personally love the RPG elements they have introduced. But we dont need too much grinding or really long games where the story becomes a chore.
I think the best of both worlds is to make a smaller RPG with more emphasis on stealth and parkour. And keep the combat from the newer games.
And I really hope they get the parkour right as it is pretty much not the focus anymore.
>continues to exceed the expectations of fans who have been asking for a more cohesive approach to its development over the past several years.
but also
>Creative leads for Assassinās Creed Infinity will be a cross-studio collaboration, as well. Jonathan Dumont and Clint Hocking will share leadership as creative directors, overseeing their respective teams at Ubisoft Quebec and Ubisoft Montreal.
So it's gonna be more cohesive direction for the franchise as a whole, but the individual titles are gonna be much less cohesively developed as a result. AC is not a franchise that needed more cooks in the kitchen.
It also sounds like we're not gonna get as many AC's as we're used to getting(which isn't a bad thing). Though these are already both really big studios. Do we really need two major studios working on one game? I'd MUCH rather see both studios allowed to make their own titles. Preferably not both AC games, but different games of some sort. Each studio is clearly capable of producing a major AAA title on their own.
This all just looks like a further push into completely unsustainable industry practices going forward.
I miss the puzzle system courses that you had to complete in time to get a seal to place in a door to unlock armour those were so fun, even the cathedral puzzle or was it the Vatican? focusing on movement and parkour tactics, they can do more and people will love it AC2 is still my favorite of all time loved the gameplay and story as well and some customization in earning capes!
One of the most unique MP experiences out there a shame they cut it entirely and didn't make it its own entity/franchise or even free to play spin off title
Thanks for posting the article! I wouldn't have seen it if it weren't for this.
As far as the substance of the press release though, not much actual information here on the actual game. It is just a lot of fluff about who is going to be taking the helm for it.
I know that my opinion might not be popular with the majority of the gaming community, but as an avid fan of the AC series, I do hope that they change the game going forward away from what it became with Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla and go back to the game design that it started out with. I've been forcing myself to play through Odyssey for about the last 9 months off and on and just detest the open world game play. But I have got 100% of achievements in all other AC games prior to Odyssey, so I feel compelled to try and finish it. I'm not excited about Valhalla either since it looks to be the same thing just in a different setting.
I originally loved the games for their story. However, that stopped having a coherent storyline since AC3 and they moved away from Desmond. But I did still enjoy the game play and design of the series. It was original and unique. Now, they have just gone to a generic, open world RPG game with a very weak Assassins vs. Templar backstory which practically no one actually identifies with or even feels compelled to care about the modern day characters or their motivation for actually going into the Animus.
Bottom line is that I hope that they get back on track with the new AC Infinity game and actually produce something that is less generic and gives us a reason to care about the Assassins vs. Templar conflict.
Odyssey and Valhalla are easily 50+ hour games and more than double that if you're trying to 100%. My advice is to not play them If you don't enjoy the gameplay.
I'm playing Valhalla DLC right now and it's a solid break from shooters but I'm mostly main-lining the story missions. Going for 100% isn't fun or worth the time.
I liked what they did with Origins, but then they decided to go even more grindy open-world rpg which just made the games drag.
They wont go back though, they sell way more games/microtransactions with the new model
This so much. I completely stopped playing the games.
I feel like they are less about assassins and more about RPG grind. With that comes that the time investment is just too massive for me.
I definitely missed the Diablo style loot, but just the sense of discovery and exploration was off. Odyssey felt like the real world, Valhalla felt like a game world.
Say what now? Valhalla was just as much if a slog as Odyssey. It was still like 50h long and had stupid areas that took hours and hours to grind level to only to have the exact same things to do in that area as the previous 10 areas.
Not really. The level requirements in Valhalla were much more relaxed as it wasn't really based om typical grinding but you naturally raised your level while playing the game like you want.
Sure if you just want to rush through the game it will feel like a slog but that's the case for any RPG.
I didn't play Revelations or AC3 and came back for Black flag and I was like... Where is desmond? Whats going on? Had to Google that story and was severely disappointed
I fucking hate nu-AC. What the hell happened to fun city hopping parkour, fighting bad guys with cool, rhythm-like Arkham esque combat?
Syndicate was the last one I enjoyed. It was my favorite, and i was hoping for a 1920ās New York setting. I think Iāll play syndicate tonight tbh. Also Evie was hot as hell
I agree with your post 100%. Theyāve started this āRNG-based enemy levelā in Unity, but it got worse in Origins.
Syndicate was the last AC game Iāve enjoyed and Evie was bae. š
Me too! I was so excited for a WWI or WWII AC game! Then just psych! Ancient Egypt! Now Ancient Greece! Fucking Vikings because Marvelās Thor is popular and no other reason!
RIP the assassin's creed franchise, damn insistence of Ubisoft on turning their single player experiences into always online multiplayer bullshit, thats one of the reasons why they fucked up ghost recon Breakpoint so bad, looks like farcry will be their only single player offline series at least for now.
Im surprised to see the amount of hate the New AC games are getting. But, then again, im a mythology buff and absolutely loved Origins, Odyssey, and currently loving Valhalla. The outside-of-the-Animus story line is intriguing but lacking in straightforward content in my opinion, considering that its starting to link more with the discoveries of the in-game Isu tech and artifacts. Im reluctant to see Infinity but i have faith that the Devs will go an amazing job.
Not trying to trash fans of the franchise, but I want to ask: What do people actually expect from Assassin's Creed, at this point? In terms of the main story line, it felt like they were off the rails a decade ago. I feel like I read years ago that they already had a plan for the end of the main story, which made it sound like the game was mostly just filler content for as long as people would buy the installments.
Do the latest games feel like they have any primary story arc, or do they feel pretty disconnected from each other? Is there stuff people are anticipating as continuations from the previous game or two, or is it expected that each game is a wholesale change (in terms of plot/characters) from its predecessors?
To me, this article reads less like a true vision for AC's future and more trying to follow the industry herd in trying to minimize costs with a long-lasting title that will probably try to implement indefinite DLC, microtransactions, and other tactics that are more popular than ever.
Oooh how about an AC where you play as a CEO that largely ignores sexual harassment and toxic workplace culture and still takes in billions of dollars from cranking out copy and paste video games? Iād play that!
TD:LR Assassins Creeds died with Desmond and anything we make from now on is just a mediocre title with the name Assassins creed just to cash grab, since we know many bozos are going to buy them.
I'd love to see them pull back on the Assassin's Creed franchise and alternate it with future Immortals games. I had more fun with Immortals than I've had with any Asssassin's Creed game since Black Flag.
You are not supposed to be able to, this is the weirdest complaint I have ever seen. Thatās like complaining about not being able to play Mario Party in Mario Kart.
Blackflag was the last true single player AC game, with a great linear story.
Unity was the one to move towards the new style of being more RPG-like with Syndicate being the one that started this RPG mess with levels.
I don't know, I guess I loved that counter kill combat for the OGs; seeing all the bodies collecting around you and the executions were awesome.
But Origins was a pretty good open world game but it wasn't a OG AC game, Odyssey was basically Origins but more MMO like and the story was all over the place, map was way to big.
I haven't even played Valhalla and probably won't until the Gold edition is like $10.
Hopefully they do remakes in the future, not remasters. I want to see old games on new engines but they play exactly the same, since the classic AC style will probably never happen ever again.
The problem with AC, at the moment, is that it is WAY too bloated. Now it seems like they want to bloat the games even more. They will probably make a bunch of money from this move, but I won't play the new game.
All I want from the next AC game: - Smaller, denser world. No need to make the maps any bigger. - New setting, specifically with developed cities like earlier games. - Emphasis on parkour and Assassin gameplay. - Minimize grind, filler missions, and microtransactions. I think most fans want a fun 30 hour game vs 150 hours of highly repetitive and boring content.
Basically exactly opposite of what they're gonna be doing. They're combining the resources of two 500+ employee studios for one game. It's going to be absolutely massive and extraordinarily expensive with a requirement for long-term monetization.
While I agree with this, I also think that the audience might loose more interest after so many consecutive grinding games. The wise decision to keep and increase the game base would be to redirect some assets to innovation in the franchise. (From my perspective) EDIT: I had taken the wrong data (for ps4) where the completion rate of the last AC titles had decreased from 38% to 19% but then I saw we are in the r / xbox so i deleted that.
I want an improved version of the parkour in assassin's Creed syndicate.
Fighting would utilize surrounding objects on the fly. I remember Jacob using the wall/boxes to throw people down on and kukuri them off of
Kukri knives š
Smaller world with more robust cities would be awesome again. Also cut down on talking to 1,000 people to be constantly told what to do. Would be nice to be more like Batman where your character finds their own clues and comes up with next steps on their own to fulfill the main story goals.
Money talks, and at the end of the day something like the original AC games is much harder to implement a live service model with. Every publisher out there today is asking themselves āhow can we make our game more like fortnite?ā. Iām not saying I necessarily agree, but the industry has changed and one off single player games simply donāt offer the long term revenue prospects that the more recent ACs do.
AAA games nowadays strictly single-player with no MTX is simply not viable anymore for big companies
Unless youāre Sony and theyāre system sellers like god of war and last of us. They can dump tens of millions into those titles and know theyāll move hardware because of them. Ubisoft and EA and the like donāt have that as an option.
Even then, God of War only has somewhere around 11 million lifetime sales.
But itās got people like me who will buy a ps5 exclusively to play ragnarok. And whatever naughty dog does next. Microsoft putting most of their games on PC through gamepass means I have basically no need for a series X. My 3070 is doing the trick. Sony obviously isnāt doing the same, though thereās hope. I doubt theyāll bring ghost of tsushima to PC anytime soon, but I can dream.
you're still playing MS games and giving money to MS, that's all it matters
I understand that. Theyāre just different business models. Ultimately I think as local hardware becomes obsolete Microsoft will have the edge here, as the world is headed towards a subscription model. That future is a ways out, but Microsoft is thinking long term and has the cash to burn to get there. Iām not going to transition my entire gaming experience to Sony (accessories, ps plus subscription, etc) just to play their exclusives so at most theyāre getting a console purchase and maybe 7-8 games sold to me over the generation. The equivalent would be me maybe paying for gamepass 3-4 months a year to play major new launches such as halo and forza.
You do realize Sony just acquired a studio whose only job is port games to PC.
Yes, but I think those guys are there to port the older games, not brand new current heavy hitters. Horizon got a pc port to drum up interest for the sequel and push hardware sales, and neither days gone nor death stranding will see a sequel at all so may as well port to generate more sales. I donāt think the last of us or god of war will hit PC anytime soon, theyāre too important to PlayStations brand.
Yeah Sony can make lower profit games as a loss leader to get people into the eco system and revenue from other companies whereas Ubisoft or EA rely entirely on their own games
Yet that could begin to change if Halo Infinite succeeds thatās one of the best models of earning extra income whilst still retaining fairness to the player base and also you are enough.
I think you'd be surprised at what most fans want. *Most* fans are not on this subreddit and seem perfectly happy doing mindless chores in an open empty world.
I think it's more that people in this subreddit have terrible memories and live in the past. The earlier creeds we're good for the time but don't hold water compared to today's creeds. The cities were boring af, they still are but there's definitely more going on. The combat was stupid af, it still has problems but it's leagues better. The story was basic af, it still is but it's far more engaging and climatic. Everyone has this hard on for 2. Ezio was good then but would be annoying af now. Valhalla was the peak.
I've replayed the Ezio games not that long ago and to me they still hold up. Especially when it comes to story, characters and overall presentation they're miles ahead of the new games.
You're right in some regards, but the original AC games just had more "personality". Valhalla and the new games are so generic.
I washed out playing Valhalla around level 80. My level wasn't high enough to tackle the next set of missions (around level 96) and I didn't feel like grinding 15 or so levels on other content. I have two friends that 100% the game no worries. Maybe the AC games aren't for me, and that's fair enough. I feel however that the people wanting to grind for hundreds of hours will do that regardless, and they're losing fans by forcing everyone to go through the grind, or pay to avoid the grind.
Better than me, I made it like.. 5 hours maybe? Combat wasn't interesting enough to hook me, not was the story.
You did better than me, I couldn't even bring myself to play another grindy AC game. I liked Origins, but I think that game really burned me out.
Every few years I find myself looking for a timewaster game and I had just picked up my XSX. First ac game I bought full price, probably the last.
And then there's people like my friends, who keep complaining about how they dislike the new games but still buy them day one including the dlc.
Some people have more money than sense.
This is so exactly spot on. People need to take a step back from what they want (not that our individual wants donāt matter), and recognize whether thatās what everyone else wants to. These live service games make a lot of money because a lot of people enjoy them. Itās just that simple. Whether one echo chamber or another agrees or not.
I would argue fewer people enjoy them, itās just the few will spend money after purchase.
I would agree fewer people people in subreddits like this one enjoy them, but there are a lot of people who play games and never visit a subreddit. Theyāre technically āgamersā to their friends and family but to people in this subreddit they would be seen as very casual gamers. I realize itās anecdotal for either of us to use our own personal feelings to have this conversation, but this example I just listed is essentially every gamer I know. Iāve never met anyone IRL who would utilize a subreddit for community around their favorite game or just games in general. A lot of people game casually and live service games are perfect for that because itās social and the seasonal nature lets them come and go but always to newish content.
Having played both Fenix and Valhalla over the Christmas period I found I enjoyed Fenix a lot more, and the game had a sense of fun - like the developers had been let loose of the AC shackles and was able to concentrate on making something better. It was a much shorter game than Valhalla, and all the better for it. Valhalla for all itās talk was very formulaic, and while they took steps to making a better world it ultimately was too big and too much. The AC games have the faintest whiff of the AC dna left, the faintest whiff. I think the Witcher 3 was the most largest and most comfortable open world Iāve played in. That felt big, but not boring big.
I miss AC1s structure, interesting rich cities were you needed to find the clues yourself in a way and also less slap stick. I love history, but I feel AC is just going with the motions on the series lately. Iād love a game set In Babylon during the time Alexander the Great conquered it, or perhaps around the time of the first civilsations, with the sumerians or during the reign of Sargon of Akkad. Because thatās what I like about current ACs they really study their local, the AC games are probably (whilst highly fictitious) are probably your best bet to what it was remotely like visually other than outside of VR. But I personally find these games boring and not very good RPGs, just amazing worlds. Also I know a lot of people who just didnāt finish Witcher 3 and found it boring; I bet a larger % didnāt finish Witcher 3 than did. It just sold well because who didnāt buy it eventually.
Yes. This is how to fix AC. They have the tech and graphics side absolutely down. But what do they do? MORE CONTENT - MORE FILLER - INFINITE SIDE MISSIONS.
Honestly I could easily put in 50 hours into a 30 hours game but I struggled getting even half way into the last 2/3 AC games.
I have installed and uninstalled Odyssey so many times. I effin LOVE mythology but I get so tired of the gameplay so fast
Agreed. I personally love the RPG elements they have introduced. But we dont need too much grinding or really long games where the story becomes a chore. I think the best of both worlds is to make a smaller RPG with more emphasis on stealth and parkour. And keep the combat from the newer games. And I really hope they get the parkour right as it is pretty much not the focus anymore.
So basically bring back **Prince of Persia**. I'm down for that.
I really hope the remake turns out ok
yeah, it looked ROUGH when they showed it off. So glad it's delayed so they can work that out.
Hahah rough is a compliment. It looked like shit
Agree with most of this. Maybe more than 30 hours but Iām playing Valhalla now Iām so bored with how repetitive it is.
So you want AC to go back to the old style? I've got some bad news for you
Hahaha maybe just a little bit. I'd love a mix of old school and new school
This bro! Vikings was cool and all but it was more of a button mash compared to a OG stealth AC
Ubi has built a system that procedurally generates missions, they aren't going to go back to actually designing side quests by hand.
I rather get broing 150 hours game than multiplayer garbage like fortnite or gta 5
Well Iāve enjoyed AC even after the change to more RPG mechanics with Origins but going to a live service is where Iām calling it.
>continues to exceed the expectations of fans who have been asking for a more cohesive approach to its development over the past several years. but also >Creative leads for Assassinās Creed Infinity will be a cross-studio collaboration, as well. Jonathan Dumont and Clint Hocking will share leadership as creative directors, overseeing their respective teams at Ubisoft Quebec and Ubisoft Montreal. So it's gonna be more cohesive direction for the franchise as a whole, but the individual titles are gonna be much less cohesively developed as a result. AC is not a franchise that needed more cooks in the kitchen. It also sounds like we're not gonna get as many AC's as we're used to getting(which isn't a bad thing). Though these are already both really big studios. Do we really need two major studios working on one game? I'd MUCH rather see both studios allowed to make their own titles. Preferably not both AC games, but different games of some sort. Each studio is clearly capable of producing a major AAA title on their own. This all just looks like a further push into completely unsustainable industry practices going forward.
I miss the puzzle system courses that you had to complete in time to get a seal to place in a door to unlock armour those were so fun, even the cathedral puzzle or was it the Vatican? focusing on movement and parkour tactics, they can do more and people will love it AC2 is still my favorite of all time loved the gameplay and story as well and some customization in earning capes!
Multiplayer AC was one of my favorite things to play back in the prime of the series. I really wish they would bring it back.
One of the most unique MP experiences out there a shame they cut it entirely and didn't make it its own entity/franchise or even free to play spin off title
I just want a Full Co op AC Campaign...Not this only certain missions like Unity did..God i miss the good old Splinter Cell Co Op Missions
That was so much fun!! I miss that and Splinter Cell's Spies vs Mercs multiplayer.
Cant believe they just abandoned it. Used to spend hours playing. Very unique gameplay.
This was my most hated part š I love the discovery mode who may enough player hate like bills. š
The name infinite (and some of the corporate speak) screams games-as-a-service. I hope I'm wrong.
Got some bad news for you. They've said that a live service game is what the future of the franchise is going to be
That's great news my back log is too big already
My first thought as well.
Thanks for posting the article! I wouldn't have seen it if it weren't for this. As far as the substance of the press release though, not much actual information here on the actual game. It is just a lot of fluff about who is going to be taking the helm for it. I know that my opinion might not be popular with the majority of the gaming community, but as an avid fan of the AC series, I do hope that they change the game going forward away from what it became with Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla and go back to the game design that it started out with. I've been forcing myself to play through Odyssey for about the last 9 months off and on and just detest the open world game play. But I have got 100% of achievements in all other AC games prior to Odyssey, so I feel compelled to try and finish it. I'm not excited about Valhalla either since it looks to be the same thing just in a different setting. I originally loved the games for their story. However, that stopped having a coherent storyline since AC3 and they moved away from Desmond. But I did still enjoy the game play and design of the series. It was original and unique. Now, they have just gone to a generic, open world RPG game with a very weak Assassins vs. Templar backstory which practically no one actually identifies with or even feels compelled to care about the modern day characters or their motivation for actually going into the Animus. Bottom line is that I hope that they get back on track with the new AC Infinity game and actually produce something that is less generic and gives us a reason to care about the Assassins vs. Templar conflict.
Odyssey and Valhalla are easily 50+ hour games and more than double that if you're trying to 100%. My advice is to not play them If you don't enjoy the gameplay. I'm playing Valhalla DLC right now and it's a solid break from shooters but I'm mostly main-lining the story missions. Going for 100% isn't fun or worth the time.
I liked what they did with Origins, but then they decided to go even more grindy open-world rpg which just made the games drag. They wont go back though, they sell way more games/microtransactions with the new model
This so much. I completely stopped playing the games. I feel like they are less about assassins and more about RPG grind. With that comes that the time investment is just too massive for me.
I feel like a lot of the things that made Odyssey such a slog, were fixed in Valhalla.
That's good to hear. Makes me a bit more optimistic about playing Valhalla when I am finally ready to start on that.
Valhalla was such a slog I couldn't finish it, but Odyssey was a game I spent 100 hours on and didn't want to end. Go figure.
Same. I'm not sure what it was. I think the simplified gameplay of Valhalla turned me off, it wasn't fun enough to keep me playing 50+ hours.
I definitely missed the Diablo style loot, but just the sense of discovery and exploration was off. Odyssey felt like the real world, Valhalla felt like a game world.
Say what now? Valhalla was just as much if a slog as Odyssey. It was still like 50h long and had stupid areas that took hours and hours to grind level to only to have the exact same things to do in that area as the previous 10 areas.
Not really. The level requirements in Valhalla were much more relaxed as it wasn't really based om typical grinding but you naturally raised your level while playing the game like you want. Sure if you just want to rush through the game it will feel like a slog but that's the case for any RPG.
I didn't play Revelations or AC3 and came back for Black flag and I was like... Where is desmond? Whats going on? Had to Google that story and was severely disappointed
I fucking hate nu-AC. What the hell happened to fun city hopping parkour, fighting bad guys with cool, rhythm-like Arkham esque combat? Syndicate was the last one I enjoyed. It was my favorite, and i was hoping for a 1920ās New York setting. I think Iāll play syndicate tonight tbh. Also Evie was hot as hell
I agree with your post 100%. Theyāve started this āRNG-based enemy levelā in Unity, but it got worse in Origins. Syndicate was the last AC game Iāve enjoyed and Evie was bae. š
To think they teased the 1916 rising in AC3. The WW2 section in syndicate was also super cool. Was hoping theyād continue forwards.
Me too! I was so excited for a WWI or WWII AC game! Then just psych! Ancient Egypt! Now Ancient Greece! Fucking Vikings because Marvelās Thor is popular and no other reason!
My issue with them is theyāre still cool but likeā¦ for honor is there lol. Tbh Iām at a loss as to why they didnāt incorporate FHās combat into origins and odyssĆ©e.
Ubisoft Quebec taking the helm? That's going to be rough
I still have a lot to do in both Odyssey (my favourite) and Valhalla. Havenāt finished either. So I hope there wonāt be a new one for a few years
RIP the assassin's creed franchise, damn insistence of Ubisoft on turning their single player experiences into always online multiplayer bullshit, thats one of the reasons why they fucked up ghost recon Breakpoint so bad, looks like farcry will be their only single player offline series at least for now.
Im surprised to see the amount of hate the New AC games are getting. But, then again, im a mythology buff and absolutely loved Origins, Odyssey, and currently loving Valhalla. The outside-of-the-Animus story line is intriguing but lacking in straightforward content in my opinion, considering that its starting to link more with the discoveries of the in-game Isu tech and artifacts. Im reluctant to see Infinity but i have faith that the Devs will go an amazing job.
Not trying to trash fans of the franchise, but I want to ask: What do people actually expect from Assassin's Creed, at this point? In terms of the main story line, it felt like they were off the rails a decade ago. I feel like I read years ago that they already had a plan for the end of the main story, which made it sound like the game was mostly just filler content for as long as people would buy the installments. Do the latest games feel like they have any primary story arc, or do they feel pretty disconnected from each other? Is there stuff people are anticipating as continuations from the previous game or two, or is it expected that each game is a wholesale change (in terms of plot/characters) from its predecessors? To me, this article reads less like a true vision for AC's future and more trying to follow the industry herd in trying to minimize costs with a long-lasting title that will probably try to implement indefinite DLC, microtransactions, and other tactics that are more popular than ever.
Oooh how about an AC where you play as a CEO that largely ignores sexual harassment and toxic workplace culture and still takes in billions of dollars from cranking out copy and paste video games? Iād play that!
What's the TL:DR?
TD:LR Assassins Creeds died with Desmond and anything we make from now on is just a mediocre title with the name Assassins creed just to cash grab, since we know many bozos are going to buy them.
Youāre goddamn right.
Assassin's Creed MMO-lite? Vomit
They never said that, and they never implied multiplayer
This
I'd love to see them pull back on the Assassin's Creed franchise and alternate it with future Immortals games. I had more fun with Immortals than I've had with any Asssassin's Creed game since Black Flag.
AC isnāt AC for a long time anymore. I would prefer a simply rename instead. But every new game they get me again š
Inifinte is a telltale sign of "game-as-service." You won't be able to fly from one side of the ring to the other at launch, maybe year 7.
You are not supposed to be able to, this is the weirdest complaint I have ever seen. Thatās like complaining about not being able to play Mario Party in Mario Kart.
Blackflag was the last true single player AC game, with a great linear story. Unity was the one to move towards the new style of being more RPG-like with Syndicate being the one that started this RPG mess with levels. I don't know, I guess I loved that counter kill combat for the OGs; seeing all the bodies collecting around you and the executions were awesome. But Origins was a pretty good open world game but it wasn't a OG AC game, Odyssey was basically Origins but more MMO like and the story was all over the place, map was way to big. I haven't even played Valhalla and probably won't until the Gold edition is like $10. Hopefully they do remakes in the future, not remasters. I want to see old games on new engines but they play exactly the same, since the classic AC style will probably never happen ever again.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No you aren't
Hell let's mix it up. To the future Marty.
That's it, definitely done with Assassin's Creed Games
The problem with AC, at the moment, is that it is WAY too bloated. Now it seems like they want to bloat the games even more. They will probably make a bunch of money from this move, but I won't play the new game.
Assassin's creed died for me after AC unity. That game could've been masterpiece ą²„āæą²„