It's just weird seein people complain because they have to play sidequests, especially in this game where most of them are pretty good
I would say that maybe 20% of the side quests in this game are "good".
It's just weird seein people complain because they have to play sidequests, especially in this game where most of them are pretty good
Okay whatever if they are that important they should be main story stuff for me. Everything else is game filler time for me as with every game. It's called side quest for a reason. Witcher 3 also had these sidequests which had great development and all, but the game didn't force me to play them to level up for the main quest.
That's the rub right there. You get significantly more xp for playing on harder difficulties. I played on hard too and never found myself blocked by level content but I imagine that folk on normal or easy might have had a different experience. Ubisoft could have saved themselves a headache if they just scaled up the amount of xp the lower difficulties received so keep the progression speed vaguely the same across all difficulties.That Corinthia zone is a 22-25 lvl zone (but in my game, enemies are same lvl as me) . I'm 20 levels above what's necessary in that region, and i'm playing on Hard Difficult.
I'm really sad for you if you only play the main quest in games, even the witcher 3 side quests are way better than the main story, regions in Odyssey litterally have their own contained storiesOkay whatever if they are that important they should be main story stuff for me. Everything else is game filler time for me as with every game. It's called side quest for a reason. Witcher 3 also had these sidequests which had great development and all, but the game didn't force me to play them to level up for the main quest.
Edit: I mean it's a great game for many people and I am happy for them, but I miss my old AC style which didn't force me to play more than I had to.
i see Odyssey like Skyrim, there really isn't a main plot to follow. There's atleast 4 main threads to follow. Go forth and adventure! :D
I'm really sad for you if you only play the main quest in games, even the witcher 3 side quests are way better than the main story, regions in Odyssey litterally have their own contained stories
Of all the arguments I've seen, this might be the worst one.For those who don't do the side quests
Do you buy games often? I mean it's 60 dollars a game...:o I don't understand why rushing it
Not in this game they don't.Okay whatever if they are that important they should be main story stuff for me. Everything else is game filler time for me as with every game. It's called side quest for a reason. Witcher 3 also had these sidequests which had great development and all, but the game didn't force me to play them to level up for the main quest.
Edit: I mean it's a great game for many people and I am happy for them, but I miss my old AC style which didn't force me to play more than I had to.
For those who don't do the side quests
Do you buy games often? I mean it's 60 dollars a game...:o I don't understand why rushing it
I don't know
I work too but if i buy a game i want to complete it
Okay whatever if they are that important they should be main story stuff for me. Everything else is game filler time for me as with every game. It's called side quest for a reason. Witcher 3 also had these sidequests which had great development and all, but the game didn't force me to play them to level up for the main quest.
Edit: I mean it's a great game for many people and I am happy for them, but I miss my old AC style which didn't force me to play more than I had to.
I guess there are some people that literally ignore everything and only follow a single questline. :)
So next time around they will make all of these side quests mandatory, and instead of having to do 80% of them, you will have to do all of them. Just to remove these types of complaints.
Or let people play through the main story without the necessity of finding Alcibiades' socks, or finding the stolen collar of the woman at the port, or killing this evil general at the fort.Ubisoft should implement a menu point "Skip to end credits" for people who don't care about gameplay and just want to cross the game from their backlog checklist. That way you can skip all the "grinding", right?
Not that "it's not an assassin's creed game" again pleaaase no....
I was so tired by Syndicate i don't want to go back except if it's Unity style (the best AC game gameplay before the Origins era)
For those who don't do the side quests
Do you buy games often? I mean it's 60 dollars a game...:o I don't understand why rushing it
If you were playing it for the story, you should have been playing the golden sidequests too, which are well enough to level you up.Yeah, I'm playing Assassins Creed for the story not side quests, I got stuck in Odyssey because I was horribly under leveled... and then I just stopped caring and traded the game in.
Yeah, I'm playing Assassins Creed for the story not side quests, I got stuck in Odyssey because I was horribly under leveled... and then I just stopped caring and traded the game in.
Seems like that. Also apparently easy difficulty gives less XP, so it can be a factor too.I finished the game with 115 hours in and being level 64. Never was underleveled for a single location I went to.
I guess there are some people that literally ignore everything and only follow a single questline. :)
There are 4 main story arcs in the game and one or two of them open when you do a quest which looks like a sidequest. Also, the quality of sidequests is above and beyond previous AC games.Yeah, I'm playing Assassins Creed for the story not side quests, I got stuck in Odyssey because I was horribly under leveled... and then I just stopped caring and traded the game in.
It's been like 4 months now, people have repeatedly spelled out what the problem is, how game length has ballooned over the years with "side content" being practically mandatory and we still have people going
"That's completely ridiculous, I just don't understand how anyone could be underleveled!"
There's an argument to be made in favour of the Origins/Odyssey template and people certainly seem to be enjoying the new format well enough. But if you still don't understand why someone might not enjoy this whereas they enjoyed the previous games, you don't want to understand.
So next time around they will make all of these side quests mandatory, and instead of having to do 80% of them, you will have to do all of them. Just to remove these types of complaints.
I see people still don't know what the word 'grind' means. A hint: It does not mean "doing side content".
If they deem these quests important for the story then I would be fine with it. Now it's side quests...which you could do by the side. If they are really that important and have such great storys in them then Ubisoft should have made them mandatory, but I guess it would be too much bloat for the main story which would force them to do things differently.
This.I see people still don't know what the word 'grind' means. A hint: It does not mean "doing side content".
Is this a "please make content I want to skip mandatory" request?
I didn't play yet, can you go to the end chapter without doing fetch quests and "Ubisoft quests" (like cleaning the map for things that don't matter just to keep the game longer) ?
I only do meaningful side quests and main quest because AC and ubi games in general is not my thing
some people dont got a lot of time to spend on their games. there is no reason to not allow them to enjoy the game because they cant waste time on meaningless side missions/quests and would rather just go through the story.For those who don't do the side quests
Do you buy games often? I mean it's 60 dollars a game...:o I don't understand why rushing it
Yes. Most of my time was just doing the golden quests and it has been a pretty great experience so far.I didn't play yet, can you go to the end chapter without doing fetch quests and "Ubisoft quests" (like cleaning the map for things that don't matter just to keep the game longer) ?
I only do meaningful side quests and main quest because AC and ubi games in general is not my thing
I don't know what you want, but it's a "please include important story bits in the main quest like it's suppose to be" request for me if they are able to.
Well, you're required to be in the last level to get the endings of some of the storylines. Not sure if that was changed in a patch or not (I know they raised the level cap, but I'm not sure if the missions are still capped at level 50).I didn't play yet, can you go to the end chapter without doing fetch quests and "Ubisoft quests" (like cleaning the map for things that don't matter just to keep the game longer) ?
I only do meaningful side quests and main quest because AC and ubi games in general is not my thing
And if is required to play a lot for banile quests to me it decreases a lot how much I want to pay for a game
AC is a RPG now, an this is a staple of most RPGs. People are justl yellingIt's been like 4 months now, people have repeatedly spelled out what the problem is, how game length has ballooned over the years with "side content" being practically mandatory and we still have people going
"That's completely ridiculous, I just don't understand how anyone could be underleveled!"
There's an argument to be made in favour of the Origins/Odyssey template and people certainly seem to be enjoying the new format well enough. But if you still don't understand why someone might not enjoy this whereas they enjoyed the previous games, you don't want to understand.
I see people still don't know what the word 'grind' means. A hint: It does not mean "doing side content".
To be fair, both The Witcher 3 and Horizon have the same RPG template, and I never felt missing as many (or any) levels as in Assassins Creed. I definitely had to do way less side content in those games in comparison to Odyssey and Origins.AC is a RPG now, an this is a staple of most RPGs. People are just teYlling
at what the game advertised itself to be.
I see people still don't know what the word 'grind' means. A hint: It does not mean "doing side content".
This.
Back in my day, it meant doing the same thing over and over to get XP or cash. But now apparently it is playing the game like the developers intended.
Ok thanksWell, you're required to be in the last level to get the endings of some of the storylines. Not sure if that was changed in a patch or not (I know they raised the level cap, but I'm not sure if the missions are still capped at level 50).
I'm not 100% sure if the now called "main side quests" are all you need to get there.
TW3 ? You need to complete side quests in that game to properly keep up with the main quest in that game too, what hell are you talking about?Japanese RPG grind and what is broadly being spoken about here are two different things. I continue to be amazed on supposedly one of the internets largest gaming forums people are purposefully or ignorantly conflating "I grinded in Final Fantasy to level 99" with discussing what is generally Western open-world RPG formulas.
Even the recent JRPGs have adapted to be less grindy as they used to be, now more favouring optional bosses or dungeons as what may require grind, not so much the MSQ.
Grind comes in many different forms, and having to or feeling obligated to clean up generic quest markers, towers, radiant quests, picking plants or whatever mundane task it is to keep up with a level-gated MSQ is perceived as grind whether some of you like it or not. Its archaic design. It's often clumsy, cheap and not organic.
It attaches to what can often be referred to as open world bloat in many Western RPGs that have been pumped out in the last 5~10 years. The further rustling of jimmies here is when people perceive said bloat to start shifting into the "mandatory" rather than the "waste time doing this shit if you want".
Again, I implore anyone wanting to seriously explore game design around open world concepts to watch that video above, and also re-look at games like Morrowind, or even TW3. Take off any blinders around how much you personally enjoyed the latest AC games, or Ubisoft open world games and try and understand it's okay to critique the path Ubisoft is going down.
Witcher 3 has a setting same as Origind and Odyssey that brings lower level enemies up to your level.I think it's sometimes considered an issue because it's not normal for the AC series. But for an RPG it's a very efficient system, that doesn't require grinding at all, and you'll be fine with only doing some of the side quests. Complaining that you can't skip straight to the next core plot point all the time just sounds weird to RPG gamers. "Can't I just skip to the point where I find Ciri already? Why do I need to bother with the Baron and these bog witches? Why did I need to help the mute kid who loves to defecate to the sunrise?"
I also completed all the side content and exploration I could find (other than the procedural stuff, which I always ignored), and had the same issue - so massively over-levelled I could skip ahead to zones that were supposed to be for high end content. But I did the same thing in the Witcher 3 and found I prefer Odyssey's system of levelling up enemies to a couple of levels below you to keep that content at least somewhat interesting. In TW3 I was just one-shotting everything, boss fights lost all sense of challenge and tension, and it marred the gameplay for me.
What makes you feel your take on how "it's supposed to be" is actually how it's supposed to be? Open world RPGs count on side quests for you to get xp and appropriate loot, it's been that way in Witcher games, Dragon Age games, Mass Effect and others, why are people pulling Surprised Pikachu now?
You do know that you can just play the golden quests right? These have the same quality as the main missions and give you good rewards. They are not busy work.Japanese RPG grind and what is broadly being spoken about here are two different things. I continue to be amazed on supposedly one of the internets largest gaming forums people are purposefully or ignorantly conflating "I grinded in Final Fantasy to level 99" with discussing what is generally Western open-world RPG formulas.
Even the recent JRPGs have adapted to be less grindy as they used to be, now more favouring optional bosses or dungeons as what may require grind, not so much the MSQ.
Grind comes in many different forms, and having to or feeling obligated to clean up generic quest markers, towers, radiant quests, picking plants or whatever mundane task it is to keep up with a level-gated MSQ is perceived as grind whether some of you like it or not. Its archaic design. It's often clumsy, cheap and not organic. This isn't an MMO, it's a SP game and the design ethos behind a SP game should ALWAYS be about favouring the player.
It attaches to what can often be referred to as open world bloat in many Western RPGs that have been pumped out in the last 5~10 years. The further rustling of jimmies here is when people perceive said bloat to start shifting into the "mandatory" rather than the "waste time doing this shit if you want". I don't personally care if you want to 100% the AC map, that's up to you. The design balance for a multi-million unit selling franchise, however, should consider not everyone necessarily wants to spend weeks 100% every generic thing on a map. Not to mention any developer or designer who cares about their product should always be considering the level of quality of put into it, from writing to repetition, to how mundane something is.
Again, I implore anyone wanting to seriously explore game design around open world concepts to watch that video I posted above and also re-look at games like Morrowind, or even TW3. Take off any blinders around how much you personally enjoyed the latest AC games, or Ubisoft open world games and try and understand it's okay to critique the path Ubisoft is going down.