I have this theory that everyone here keeps telling everyone that they hate Ubisoft games, but actually haven't played one in years.
I don't have any evidence. Just a hunch.
So... Assassin's Creed: Origins is awful.
- Thread starter SofNascimento
- Start date
I don't have any evidence. Just a hunch.
Each to their own, I really enjoyed it. I thought the setting was really cool, Greek ruled Egypt is fascinating, and it is crazy to have the perspective that the pyramids were already older then, than cleopatra is now.
Assassins creed games do have a particular style though, I tend to enjoy them whilst playing, but then really not feel like playing another one for a few years. I am yet to play odyssey, though I am starting to get tempted.
Assassins creed games do have a particular style though, I tend to enjoy them whilst playing, but then really not feel like playing another one for a few years. I am yet to play odyssey, though I am starting to get tempted.
Doing side content because you want to is one thing. Gating you from advancing in the game to force you to grind levels or pay for boosters is another and it's bad game design.
Fortunately that doesn't happen in either Origins or Odyssey and anyone who claims otherwise either hasn't played the game or is lying.
You're fighting a losing battle, unfortunately. No telling these people
It happens in origins. Sometimes I wanted to advance the story and couldn't because the enemy levels and quest requirements were higher than mine and the enemies killed me with one hit, so I had to grind via side quests to level up.
That made me stay away from AC Odyssey because I read the same thing happens in it.
This.
I also wish they would just drop the AC part and make standalone games in those historical settings.
I finished Origins without even noticing the option to buy stuff with real money, Never felt like I was grinding.
It's not awful. It's just really boring.
The steath and the combat are kinda awful though.
For some reason I found exploring the world, doing side quests and finding new stuff in a game the the Witcher 3 really fun.
But in Assassins Creed I find it really boring.
I don't know why.
The steath and the combat are kinda awful though.
For some reason I found exploring the world, doing side quests and finding new stuff in a game the the Witcher 3 really fun.
But in Assassins Creed I find it really boring.
I don't know why.
No. You never have to "grind". You never have to do a single one of those dynamically generated fetch/kill quests.
You might have to do a unique side quest at some points to be able to advance in the main story, but that is no different from Witcher 3 or any other open world RPG that has levels, and I promise you it's going to be the same in, say, Cyberpunk.
Well, I'm telling you that was my exactly experience. I had to do a few fetch quests here and there to level up and be able to advance the story. You can't say I don't have to do what I did.
The game forced me time and again to do it and if Valhalla still has level requirements for missions, I'll avoid it.
Dragon Age, The Witcher 3 and other rpg games never forced me into doing fetch quests so I can level up to advance the story.
I'm sorry, but that's just how it is.
I agree to an extent - Ubi has a habit of filling their games with boring crap. The OCD in me means I get burned out before I even finish the main quest - I never finished the Origins main quest despite putting 60+ hours in but I still had a lot of fun with the game. Exact same thing happened in Odyssey (not as good a game as Origins).
Ubi need to either cut down their worlds and boring side quests or take some inspiration from the Witcher 3 and fill the world with fun and interesting quests.
Ubi need to either cut down their worlds and boring side quests or take some inspiration from the Witcher 3 and fill the world with fun and interesting quests.
I don't care enough to replay Origins for the third time just to prove you wrong with receipts, but I finished it twice and I didn't have to do a single one of those non-unique quests.
I'm playing through it now. While I agree that the gameplay itself leaves a lot to be desired, the story is excellent. I don't know what you're talking about. The only thing that had me going "wtf" is near the end where Bayek and Aya are like "It was him all along! We trusted him. We were so blind" etc. except the guy they were talking about had like 3 lines in the entire game up till then and only showed up 2 missions prior
Neither games are awful. They are both very well done.
For me, the content amount outweighs the gameplay feedback loop way too much to finish the game.
Too much uninteresting content is actually a thing, one that this gen has shown quite a bit. Witcher 3 and RDR2 get more of a pass because the content remains entertaining. The quests tend to be a bit more entertaining even if the feedback loop doesn't change much.
The new AC games go too far in this direction.
For me, the content amount outweighs the gameplay feedback loop way too much to finish the game.
Too much uninteresting content is actually a thing, one that this gen has shown quite a bit. Witcher 3 and RDR2 get more of a pass because the content remains entertaining. The quests tend to be a bit more entertaining even if the feedback loop doesn't change much.
The new AC games go too far in this direction.
I don´t understand how stating an opinion here is wrong. Just because you don´t agree with it doesn´t make it wrong. Not everybody is the same and interested in the similar things. To think that Assasins Creed: Origins is bad is not a personal attack on you or your friends.
A game can control great and still be shit.
It can look amazing and still be shit.
It can have tons and tons of content and replayability and still be shit.
It can have sublime writing and story and still be shit.
Because, it´s about not only how the multitude of cogs function together, but also how the player responds to each cog individually as well as together.
Just because a game is highly regarded by the many doesn´t make the opinion of the few any less valid.
I don´t get how it´s okay for people to create a thread praising the game, but it´s not allowed to create a thread not praising the game? Like, wtf is the point of having a discussion forum then?
I loved Origins, and Odyssey too for that matter. Sure there was a bit too much going on in the games, but it's not like you had to do everything. I just replayed Odyssey again and was hit level 40 before I even uncovered half the map.
Oh you are totally allowed to make a thread like this. But the unnecessary inflammatory title coupled with some questionable assumptions about Dark Souls and whatnot... I'm just wondering what the desired discourse is.
For example, I strongly disliked Death Stranding, which seems to be a darling game for many here. But if I wanted to make a thread about how I'm not enjoying it, I would probably say something like "tell me what you enjoyed about this game" instead of leading with "this game is awful".
The results would probably be more informative and it wouldn't just be a circle jerk or a flamewar.
Yeah the game is just offensively mediocre. Not bad per se (apart from the quests and combat) but just so bland and focus tested.
The setting held me for like 3-4 hours. Then I just lost all interest.
The setting held me for like 3-4 hours. Then I just lost all interest.
Origins and even moreso Odyssey put way too much emphasis on level progression. It's not just that quests are level gated and side quests are necessary, it's that enemies two or three levels above you end up being damage sponges and are a pain in the ass to kill. Not just a challenge, which would be fine, but annoying.
They're so close to being dream games of mine, open world melee action games with Souls-inspired combat, but the emphasis on level absolutely kills it for me. They took inspiration from Souls for combat, but missed the fact that the power curve in Souls is small enough that a skilled player can take on any enemy at level 1. That's *technically* possible in modern Ass Creed too, I think, but the damage number scaling makes it way, way more annoying.
Valhalla is apparently dropping levels and I'm really hoping that evens it out more.
I've been playing Skyrim again recently, and, while the level scaling isn't perfect and is often derided, at least it does it's job and allows the player to choose what they want to do and where they want to go, while also keeping enough low level enemies around that the feeling of power is still there. Souls games, while not quite as open, similarly allow players to go to some near end game areas right from the start. I think Assassins Creed needs to strive for the same kind of goal.
Also, really not a fan of people saying that those who dislike the progression system and level gating in the new Assassins Creed games didn't play it. I've bought Odyssey twice, once on PS4 and once on PC (hoping 60 FPS would make it better for me), and have put some time into both.
They're so close to being dream games of mine, open world melee action games with Souls-inspired combat, but the emphasis on level absolutely kills it for me. They took inspiration from Souls for combat, but missed the fact that the power curve in Souls is small enough that a skilled player can take on any enemy at level 1. That's *technically* possible in modern Ass Creed too, I think, but the damage number scaling makes it way, way more annoying.
Valhalla is apparently dropping levels and I'm really hoping that evens it out more.
I've been playing Skyrim again recently, and, while the level scaling isn't perfect and is often derided, at least it does it's job and allows the player to choose what they want to do and where they want to go, while also keeping enough low level enemies around that the feeling of power is still there. Souls games, while not quite as open, similarly allow players to go to some near end game areas right from the start. I think Assassins Creed needs to strive for the same kind of goal.
Also, really not a fan of people saying that those who dislike the progression system and level gating in the new Assassins Creed games didn't play it. I've bought Odyssey twice, once on PS4 and once on PC (hoping 60 FPS would make it better for me), and have put some time into both.
Welcome to Ubisoft open world games. They fill these overly massive worlds with nothing but junk activities/filler and it sells anyway. If the content that is there to be found was actually interesting (eg. Witcher 3) and diverse, then those games would be far, far better received.
I gave it a try eventually and was baffled at the praise. It's just such a dull open world with how you interact with it.
This title is clear bait, feels like a thread just done to rile up community without any real approach to discussion, something as simple as: I didn't like this game because of x y z and what did you guys think about it would have engaged in a far more fun discussion, atm is just people throwing stones lol.
On subject, try odyssey maybe? For me was the most fun I had in an open world this gen, although have to say the gameplay loop felt super fun to me but can see other people finding it tedious.
On subject, try odyssey maybe? For me was the most fun I had in an open world this gen, although have to say the gameplay loop felt super fun to me but can see other people finding it tedious.
I played Far Cry 5 last which demonstrated to me that the Ubisoft design philosophy just doesn't do it.
Remove the map markers, make the game about 3 times more difficult and get rid of all of those pathetic "timesaver" boosters (because designing a mechanic that incentivises playing less inspires a great deal of confidence /s) and maybe we'll talk.
And this is by no means an Ubi specific problem, they just create their games so predictably formulaicly that it's easy to skip them.
Odyssey pushes it further than Origins by adding more unpredictable elements and ofc an over the top set of builds the player can invest in. Origins was the first step, Odyssey was the full push. Valhalla will be iterating on both.
I really enjoyed the game but I understand what you're saying about the quests, it's the same in Odyssey. And the concept of time savers is just so backwards it's unbelievable. I really do hope that they improve the quests for Valhalla, so far the talk sounds promising but as always the proof will be in the pudding.
"I didn't like it, so that means anyone who liked it actually didn't and are just tricking themselves into thinking they did! Everyone are sheep, but me!"
Watch out for those moons orbiting around your ego dude.
Last edited:
OP
OP
I agree with this. And I mentioned it on the OP how Origins is a great technical achievement. But I asked myself if this make it a better game, if I should not call it awful simply because of that, and, evidently, I decided that no. I'm not saying it's easy or there is not talented people involved, but this technical achievement is greatly in part a result of brute force, of massive resources and manpowers. That's why I mentioned FTL, because it feels the opposite, something that the work was done in the head of the creators, rather than simply in the programming and modeling and that technical stuff.
Think of it this way. If AC was an essay, it would have been written in a high quality paper that's very nice to touch. It would be handwritten in the most beautiful letters. It would be full of beautiful images carefully colored... but what is actually written, the subject, the ideas and thought processes that would make for a great essay are barely there. I would call that a awful essay.
Can you elaborate on what aspect of the formula you didn't engage with? The loop seems pretty reminiscent of most adventure games.
This further confirms that every Assassin's Creed game is both the best and the worst in the franchise.
Witcher 3 destroyed open worlds for me including new ac. Recently finiahed hearts of stone since that i skipped for some reason and went with blood and wine. Anyway quest, writing, characters, quest branching, decisions, new discoveries all the time....its still better thab 95% gamrs on market.
I enjoyed origins and odyssey they re not awfull but still not touching witcher. I played odyssey for 120h but wouldnt still give it more than 8. Its like they tried to mix witcher and dark souls light.
I enjoyed origins and odyssey they re not awfull but still not touching witcher. I played odyssey for 120h but wouldnt still give it more than 8. Its like they tried to mix witcher and dark souls light.
Magical game and one of my favourites this generation.
I really like the combat also, it's impactful and tense on the highest difficulty (just make sure to not rely on the not great lock on system). Going through the Gladiator Arena challanges or the highly entertaining horde mode is great fun.
I really like the combat also, it's impactful and tense on the highest difficulty (just make sure to not rely on the not great lock on system). Going through the Gladiator Arena challanges or the highly entertaining horde mode is great fun.
I enjoyed the last couple AC games precisely because they weren't too intense, and I could just kick back controlling a character in this rich, detailed world, without having to think too much and worry about "mechanics", and instead just loose myself in the setting.
What else were you trying to imply with that post? If I misunderstood I apologize, but I don't see how I did unless it was a shitpost. And if it's not what you tried to say then it's at least how it came across.
I enjoy Ubisoft games a lot more than say Sony games, primarily because of player agency.
Ubisoft basically went in a direction where they decided to give the player a lot of agency in every game with the differentiation being basically the tools you have available in each game, now this means the missions may be less unique and maybe not as imaginative i ndesign but I can insert my own creativity in it because it allows me to do that and I enjoy that a lot more. Which is why I enjoy them so much, even Siege for example is an MP game full of agency allowing you to get creative with your strategy more than any other MP game I've played and that's what makes it unique to me.
Last edited:
