AC: Origins plays the way people accuse Witcher 3 of playing

[Gravemind IV]

It's the one thing that's putting me off of Origins. For all the crap people gave W3's combat, I heavily enjoyed it and once you got it down it could actually be quite fluid, gory executions and dismembering also helped with that however. Origins just doesn't give that vibe, saw a vid of someone tackling and stabbing a guy in the throat and he needed to do that 3 times, took me straight out of it.

 

[sad but rad]

This series doesn't seem very assassiny anymore tbh.

Click to shrink...

That would be because it's not, it's an RPG set in Ancient Greece with a light coat of AC paint on it.

 

[Jeff ChickenDig]

Don't really hate the combat. Bet it feels better on pc if I ever get around to building a new one too at 60fps.

Just wish there was more variety?

Pretty disappointed that the bounty hunters don't really change anything besides being more annoying.

Odyssey enemies seem to have different abilities and buffs? Hope that mixes things up. You also have moves with different cool downs. Hope the combo animations are better...

I remember when ac2 brotherhood all the way until 4 had really slick combat animation transitions. Almost batman level. Then it all went jank.

 

[Oudone79]

I like the way is going the AC series. I'm having a great time.

 

[Linus815]

Took me a while getting used to it, but its far superior to TW3's combat system.
I never felt saitsfaction beating hordes of enemies or bosses in TW3, as opposed to ACO.

 

[Branson]

I liked a lot it once it clicked for me but I'm an idiot so I dont have the best grasp of whatever it was thats not good about it I guess.

 

[Oudone79]

The combat can be better but is going in the right direction.

 

[Deleted member 24118]

The Witcher 3 has the worst combat this side of Elder Scrolls. And at least ES gives you magic and archery to get around the shitty melee combat, in W3 you're stuck with the awful, awful sword combat the whole game.

If Origins' combat is worse than Witcher 3's, it must be some incomprehensibly awful abomination.

 

[Van Bur3n]

Took me a while getting used to it, but its far superior to TW3's combat system.
I never felt saitsfaction beating hordes of enemies or bosses in TW3, as opposed to ACO.

Click to shrink...

Just got to play the right way, bruv. Most people don't bother realizing all you can do in TW3.

 

[Isee]

AC:O plays very well in comparison to Witcher 3.
For example you move at max. speed. There is no need to hold a button all of the time.
Movement (controls) feel more accurate, quick travel is simpler, combat is about the same imo, horse controls are better etc.
The thing is: AC:O becomes very repetitive, especially the combat. Maybe I felt that way because you fight the same 6 dudes over and over again (with some variance when it come to boss encounters) and you don't really need skills or special moves. While Witcher has a much bigger enemy variety and you use potions and your magic all of the time. Still repetitive, but at the end I was bored with AC:O combat and Witcher 3 was still sort of challenging at times.

But that's okay, in a way at least. The biggest difference between Witcher 3 and AC:O is the story telling. AC:O is a beautiful game in a very interesting setting. The story is mediocre at best though and the beginning and ending is terrible. Especially the pacing.

 

[UnluckyKate]

That is to say, janky as all hell.

I'm loving the world/environment, the characters, and the story so far, but I'm really hating actually having to engage in combat. I imagine this is how a lot of people felt playing Witcher 3, a game whose combat system I personally enjoyed.

Am I alone in not liking Origins' combat system?

Click to shrink...

I hate how bland it is. Against enemies without shield ? Just mash combo.

Against a shield ? No point dodging and attack from behind, it's to rare to get a good hit, just hold shield and bait a parry... It's so boring, and hard against multiple enemies around you

 

[Stealthy Cockatrice]

Witcher 3's combat was good and much better than Origins and I had no issue with Origins combat...well except shooting arrows. That was annoying af for some reason but then again so was shooting/aiming the crossbow in witcher as well. Almost never used it.

 

[Fahdi]

People complain about:
Variety (no other type of enemies)
Combat (while playing on lower difficulties or complaining about the old style to now this)
Realism (some of the best animations I've seen are now considered Janky)
Difficulty
Story (because it didn't meet their personal expectations)

No one can ever be happy, can they?

 

[Nephilim]

I put over 200 hours in each game and loved both combat systems.
Finished both games and DLCs at the highest difficulty setting and level scaling. Whenever i revisit those fantastic worlds i'm having great fun with the gameplay too.

 

[Colossal Moo]

That would be because it's not, it's an RPG set in Ancient Greece with a light coat of AC paint on it.

Click to shrink...

Did you play game? Most of the game takes place in Egypt and you can definitely go through most enemy layers using stealth. Assassin's Creed: Origin's does have levels, upgrade points and skill but this doesn't make it an RPG. It's an open world game with some action RPG elements.

 

[Techno]

I like the combat in both games :S

I think W3 has more mechanics though, but Origins definitely has better range combat and even mounted combat.

 

[sad but rad]

Did you play game? Most of the game takes place in Egypt and you can definitely go through most enemy layers using stealth. Assassin's Creed: Origin's does have levels, upgrade points and skill but this doesn't make it an RPG. It's an open world game with some action RPG elements.

Click to shrink...

I played 30 hours of the game, would you like me to adjust it to RPG-lite? You can definitely go through it with 'stealth', given that you're the right level. Also Origins stealth is weak as fuck, as some of you seem to forget. Putting a crouch button in and letting you assassinate people from bushes isn't exactly what I would call good stealth, but you do you.

Odyssey is taking even more steps towards making this bloated bullshit an RPG, as the creative director himself has said.

 

[Atraveller]

I hate how bland it is. Against enemies without shield ? Just mash combo.

Against a shield ? No point dodging and attack from behind, it's to rare to get a good hit, just hold shield and bait a parry... It's so boring, and hard against multiple enemies around you

Click to shrink...

Holding right trigger, run away when you charge, then run back to shield break. It's not much better but there's that. At least it wasn't the original Assassin's Creed late game play: everyone blocks.

 

[Decado]

Modded Witcher 3 is one of the best real-time rpg combat systems. A good marriage of reflexes, tactics and rpg systems.

 

[Blade Wolf]

It's janky and unresponsive.

 

[Deleted member 19924]

-

 

[c0Zm1c]

I enjoy the combat in both games immensely - and I certainly wouldn't call either "janky" by any stretch of the imagination! - but the two games do so much differently it's hard to compare.

 

[4859]

Lmao.

I pointed this shit out months ago, and the defense force rallied like winged monkeys.

Guess the guilding wore off.

 

[Deleted member 29682]

Combat's good enough, it's not amazing but it does the job. 99% of the time I'm stealthing and archer-ing anyway.

Either way I prefer it to the automated 'block and mash counter to win' combat the earlier games had.

 

[4859]

Combat's good enough, it's not amazing but it does the job. 99% of the time I'm stealthing and archer-ing anyway.

Either way I prefer it to the automated 'block and mash counter to win' combat the earlier games had.

Click to shrink...

Eh.

It's really not all that much different from earlier titles if you don't use counter spam.

 

[Mr.Branding]

I don't get what's with the x is better than y rhetoric. Both games are more than competent when it comes to combat. Was salty at first that they ditched the Unity combat but after many many hours with the game, I feel it's the right decision and the souls-lite combat benefits the type of game immensely. Also, the game has a nice variety of weapon styles and the bow combat is very smooth.
In comparison, W3 (which I'm wrapping up right now for the second time) does other things better (signs, alchemy, sword animations) but it doesn't have the bows, weapon styles, etc.

Also, both are kind of tied in mounted combat also. Remember, this is coming from someone who played 80+ hours of Origins for the first time this year and then jumped straight into W3 for a second time to experience the DLC. Whenever I was playing Origins, especially on horseback I kept thinking about my memories with Witcher's awesome mounted combat but after getting into that, I kind of feel they are the same. In fact Origins' riding is much smoother than riding Roach which stops at every little road bump, and it's not a question of skill.

 

[The Booktastic Bus]

Witcher 3 has much better melee combat in general compared to Origins, I've found.

 

[kpaadet]

I was very surprised after hearing so many great things about Origins, how awful the combat/movement is.

 

[Hong Kong Hermit]

Hot take, but I still think the best AC combat was the first one. AC3 had some really impressive takedowns and stuff, but I felt too powerful. In the prologue section I would just spend ages walking up to whole platoons of British soldiers and just murdering the hell out of them with ease. It was fun and impressive to watch, but just no challenge to it.

I've spent my entire gaming life waiting for a true, satisfying, cinematic swordfighting game. Lots of hack and slash, block and parry, plenty of visual flair. I want a Hollywood sword fight. And I can't believe that I'm still waiting for it all these years later. Yeah there are lots of games where you hit things with swords, but nothing where you actually get a solid steel on steel combat going. Possibly the closest to the feel of what I'm looking for remains AC1. It wasn't super deep, but that feeling of being surrounded by a bunch of foes, blocking their attacks, doing a fancy counter while the camera moved in... it was cinematic as hell. I just want that, but with more granular control than just "hold button and hit counter". But as a starting point, that was very much the feel of what a proper swashbuckling game would feel like.

It's weird that AC turned into this rambling franchise where you just massacre thousands every game. I've killed so many innocent roof sentries who were just trying to earn a quid, you know? I wish they had gone the other way, where you kill fewer people, but the fights are way more detailed and complicated and epic. But I feel that about many games, where they put quantity of kills above making them satisfying and meaningful.

 

[grmlin]

Ha, I just commented in the Origins OT about this.

I started playing W3 this week as I needed a break from Origins. Origins plays SO MUCH BETTER, everything combat and control related in W3 feels much much worse. I enjoy it, but boy do I miss my Origins controls.

 

[oni-link]

I've not played an AC game since Rogue

Is sneaking up to someone and assassinating them no longer an option?

Origins and Odyssey look great but I still kind of enjoy the series the most when it's built around climbing and assassinating

 

[medyej]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading this thread. Origins was to me what TW3 should have played like. The smoothness of the controls and the swiftness of switching between regular movement, combat, parkour, stealth, horse riding, etc was amazing. It's one of the most pleasant games to just move around and control.

 

[Linus815]

I've not played an AC game since Rogue

Is sneaking up to someone and assassinating them no longer an option?

Origins and Odyssey look great but I still kind of enjoy the series the most when it's built around climbing and assassinating

Click to shrink...

It works like an rpg now. You can still assassinate people as long as the enemies are level appropiate and your equipment is strong enough.

 

[TheWordyGuy]

The Assassin's Creed games have never really been about combat - but in Origins I loved my archer buiild.

I wholeheartedly endorse Ubisoft's initiative to transisition this series into a full blown RPG.

 

[oni-link]

It works like an rpg now. You can still assassinate people as long as the enemies are level appropiate and your equipment is strong enough.

Click to shrink...

Ah ok, well I'm sure I'll still enjoy it when I get around to it

 

[Linus815]

I was very surprised after hearing so many great things about Origins, how awful the combat/movement is.

Click to shrink...

How does Origins have awful movement?

 

[MistaPropella]

I liked when Assassin's Creed was the kill robot game and not the Diet Dark Souls game honestly. AC should just fully accept that it has no real depth at this point. Regardless, I'm just glad they didn't keep the molasses slow combat from Unity.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I really liked the combat in the old AC games. Combat in Origins is outright shit. No fun at all. Bayek performs so damn slow. Before I can charge my heavy attack, I already get stabbed from the guy with the shield. Same with parrying with the shield. So damn slow.
Another thing is the range fighting. Those soldiers can hit me from a moving horse a couple of hundred meters away...I can't because my bow does not shoot that far.

But apart from that, I really like the game. Making my way through Egypt visiting every ? and doing all missions I come across. Currently I'm deep down in the south locating the Crocodile I think. Really a descent game. Looking forward to Odyseey.

 

[BrassDragon]

Combat is fine in both games and much of the criticism is hyperbole. Having said that, both suffer from the RPG problem that you're constantly fighting enemies above or below your level, which messes up the dynamics. If you're engaging with encounters that are in your level range, everything works as it should.

 

[Norwegian_Imposter]

Lol I love ERA and the other site before this because of the "revisionist" posts that come out around 6 months onwards after a game is out. Someone always says holy shit this is janky after it being universally praised as making massive gains from what came before (in this case the AC series) and the first posts are ALWAYS people going YES IT IS JANKY lol herd mentality is a funny thing that it exists online.

 

[grmlin]

I really don't see how the controls in Origins are bad. It's polished, works amazingly fluid and Bayek just does what I want him to do.

Gerald though... or the horse riding. Thats not even the same league if you ask me. W3's strengths are definitely found somewhere else.

 

[Ferrs]

Biggest problem IMO are the enemies, humans aren't really varied and they're too easy to guard break, so all combat encounters are strong attack -> R1 mash till death.

Pharaoh battles on the DLC are more fun because they can't be exploited like that.

 

[ThreepQuest64]

I find the combat mechanics fun and thrilling, in contrast to its predecessors, for this kind of game/genre; and pretty responsive, much more than The Witcher 3's. I hate it when the character swirls around and/don't do what they are supposed to do (although I still find The Witcher's better). Dark Souls one's could be little bit more responsive as well for my taste.

 

[tyfon]

It is bad...

But still feels like "perfection" compared with The Witcher 3 or FFXV combats.

Click to shrink...

Gamers will never agree on combat that is for sure :)
I really like FFXV combat (after the initial learning curve), but I've tried and dropped TW3 three times due to bad combat.
I was planing on maybe getting AC:O on a super sale sometime but now I'm back in the thinking box after reading this thread!

 

[Deleted member 20535]

Am I alone in not liking Origins' combat system?

Click to shrink...

No. I think it's the worst part of an otherwise good game. The problem for me is that I keep comparing everything to GOWs combat, which may be unfair, but also makes AC:O feel super clunky.

 

[grmlin]

whats clunky about the combat in Origins? It's a bit repetitive and not very sophisticated, but it works fine I think?

 

[bod]

I liked the combat in Witcher 3 and i liked the combat in Origins.

 

[Norwegian_Imposter]

Gamers will never agree on combat that is for sure :)
I really like FFXV combat (after the initial learning curve), but I've tried and dropped TW3 three times due to bad combat.
I was planing on maybe getting AC:O on a super sale sometime but now I'm back in the thinking box after reading this thread!

Click to shrink...

Try and see if you like it?

 

[Couscous]

I'm playing it right now and has worse combat than The Witcher 3 imo. The AI is also really bad and there is no enemy variety. The thing I hate the most is that Bayek turns away when I locked onto someone and walk backwards. He should still look at his enemy, I just want to get some space between me and the enemy.

The leveling system which influences combat heavily is really stulid. I'm level 15, playing on hard, and a regular enemy who is level 17 can kill me in two hits. What kind of stupid design is that. Ubisoft wants you to do their boring sidequests so that you are properly leveled up for the main quests.

 

[Fiery Phoenix]

IMO AC in general has never had decent combat. The games are at their best when you're stealthy.

Odyssey's combat looks just as janky as Origins', but it's a beautiful game so there's that.

 

[Kimura]

Don't understand the complaints at all with either W3 or ACOs combat. Think its great.