PDA

View Full Version : Your thoughts on Assassins Creed: Odyssey?



Pages : [1] 2

Kiroku
06-11-2018, 10:42 PM
I guess a lot of you guys just watched the E3 show of the new AC: Odyssey. What do you guys like and dislike so far?

The facial animations look far better than in origins and the combat looks fancy. Sadly they didnt show much about stealth gameplay until now.


Btw already a gameplay video by jorraptor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vQhjAgZI04

Seems like the Leonidas Spear is somewhat a piece of eden when looking at the background in the inventory and also the glowing animation while using it. This also explains why its so powerful when doing special attacks with it.

True_Assassin92
06-11-2018, 10:44 PM
Sorry to say but this game isn't AC. It only bears the title of AC to promote the game. It's totally rpg focused, no stealth, no creed because it plays way before origins. It just a greek spartan war game where you get to be the awesome hero with some vague AC elements.

Been a long time fan up until Origins, but I will pass this one. Dunno where you minds were at when developing this game.

Anyone else would like to share their opinion, excitement or disappointment?

BananaBlighter
06-11-2018, 10:47 PM
I was watching that gameplay and just laughing. Literally nothing in there (apart from 2 seconds of hopping across boats) indicated that this was remotely related to Assassin's Creed.

joelsantos24
06-11-2018, 10:49 PM
Yep, this is nothing more than a war game.

edz0ne
06-11-2018, 10:58 PM
I can't understand why Ubisoft would just straight up destroy what they have been doing with Origins. I mean we all know that this franchise has been hanging a bit loose and Origins was the perfect game to start repairing their damage. Ashraf and his team did an AMAZING job. To me it looks like Ash and Montreal are passionate about their project but Qubec are just people that want to milk the franchise and doesn't give a damn. Like do they think that we are stupid?? That we don't see what they are trying to do???

I am so mad right now :mad::mad:

What are you guys thinking? I will def not buy this game, not when it comes out and not even on sale. I'll just wait for the Montreal team, I have faith in Ashraf!

ModernWaffle
06-11-2018, 10:59 PM
Oh man, I honestly want to give myself a sure reason to buy this on release there is a lot that I like about it, but it's so soulless that I'm really disappointed on principle. Where were their minds going at indeed they just ditched everything iconic to the series.and for no particular reason. Let's not even get started on the protagonists, Kassandra's even missing on the cover. What an absolute poor follow-up from Bayek.

Who thought it was a good idea to take away the hidden blade, the most defining attribute of the Assassins? Seeing a good amount of combat now, I think the short spear just looks out of place should've gone dual wield or kept the shield.

I know I've complained a lot about Odyssey since it's leak but trust me, this is not what I want. Just simply frustrated.

JustLikeFisher
06-11-2018, 11:08 PM
I'm glad AC fans got a new game. But would you mind if we had a Splinter Cell for a change? :rolleyes:

Kiroku
06-11-2018, 11:14 PM
I'm glad AC fans got a new game. But would you mind if we had a Splinter Cell for a change? :rolleyes:

Of course not! I didnt even thought about a new AC a couple of weeks ago. I dont even know if it will be a good AC game.

But I dont think the AC game itself has something to do with not releasing a new Splinter Cell game since the studios working on such projects are not the same. Maybe there is a new Splinter Cell in the making but they need another year to ensure the best quality for their fans? :)


And to copy my answer from another thread:

I am sceptical too as some of you guys but I actually want to wait and see more about it before judging too hard. Maybe there is more than meets the eye.

I dont think there will be literally zero connection to the assassins lore when they talk about having more modern day in it. The whole story about those ancient gods can be connected to the ISU as we know them with the difference that people at this time doesnt even know they are the first civ ofc. And maybe the spear of leonidas is just another piece of eden juno needs to be finally free.

And ofc they would copy paste a lot stuff from origins graphical wise and combat wise but maybe they started optmizing it. We will see!

timpbader
06-11-2018, 11:28 PM
This needs to be delayed until spring! They need to work night and day to fix this mess!

YRTEP
06-11-2018, 11:30 PM
[...] And maybe the spear of leonidas is just another piece of eden juno needs to be finally free.

The Spear of Leonidas IS a PoE, they have already confirmed that.

Andorian
06-11-2018, 11:30 PM
I don't understand why there are Assassins logos on the armour: https://steamcdn-a.akamaihd.net/steam/apps/812140/ss_c334fed07712111399ab1951eee432ec9ed46d28.1920x1 080.jpg?t=1528754692
We know from Origins that logo was created much later (~40 BCE) than the events of Odyssey (~400 BCE).

Also confused with multiple endings. How could it be? Can the Animus calculate possibilities now?

And again: the main character has the same eagle vision as Bayek. We know that only a few assassins had such connection with an eagle.
And now we get two more characters with such a rare gift. Coincidence?

Looks like this game has something wrong with lore...

Will_Lucky
06-11-2018, 11:34 PM
I'm totally on board with this one. If it follows the path of Brotherhood and AC4 (improvements of the prior title) we are in for a cracking experience.

Seems to have the core Origins gameplay involved with some things in place to take account of the title taking place 400 years before Origins.

timpbader
06-11-2018, 11:43 PM
The complete removal of the hidden blade that has been a staple since AC1 is mind boggling. :(
It just doesn't feel like an assassins creed game without a hood and hidden blade.
They should have just made this a non AC game.

SenseHomunculus
06-11-2018, 11:43 PM
I agree. Looks like fun!

Megas_Doux
06-12-2018, 12:09 AM
The gameplay whereas promising it no longer feels like AC......

I don't like this.

NinjaBoyArijit
06-12-2018, 12:11 AM
I'm going to pre-order it . I was totally fine with AC Origins then why not with this one ! I feel like some people are never satisfied but who cares I already liked AC Odyssey .

WendysBrioche
06-12-2018, 12:12 AM
My thoughts are NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I miss the Origins website art Bayek NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

In all seriousness though the game looks fine.

Combat seems to be an extension/slight improvement of Origins system for a Greek style combat game.

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 12:44 AM
There is a lot jumping to conclusions here.

Apparently, this is going to be more of a MD story with a focus on Layla.

There are also hoods. The hidden blade not being part of it is kind of a drag, but I'll have to see how it plays out.

And who knows, we might still get a hidden blade. If it survived going to Egypt, it should survive going to Greece before it headed to Egypt.

karoomii
06-12-2018, 12:58 AM
I'm very underwhelmed to say the least. I'm not disappointed because the sad truth is I expected this. It's recycled in almost every aspect. And like others have pointed out, it doesn't seem to connect to the Assassin's in any way—it's a different game than AC, only it has the title for marketing.

I'll pass this year on the game.

bitebug2003
06-12-2018, 01:04 AM
Read this:

It's interesting.

https://kotaku.com/everything-we-learned-about-assassin-s-creed-odyssey-af-1826721186

There is stealth - more than in Origins

TheCool5579
06-12-2018, 01:37 AM
I'm totally excited about this one. I absolutely loved Origins despite being a Bethesda and Projekt Red fanboy. I am preordering this right now. I was hoping we would get that demo if we preordered, like I.O. did if players preordered Hitman 2. No problem I will wait 3 months. Do we fight Gods in this one also like Zeus, Area, Hades etc? And get rewards ? Hopefully...

Alakazou
06-12-2018, 01:39 AM
Already pre-order.

That said, we should probably make a topic, like the one on origins, that will compile all the information we know about the game. And the first post should be up to date.

seva.aka.simba1
06-12-2018, 01:47 AM
Hi all! I really never write anything about the games but now I just couldn't be quiet. You guys just killed The AC franchise. You buried it with Odyssey . I mean where do you see assassins creed legacy in it? You took out the assassin from the assassins creed game! Now its just another boring RPG with some blablabla choices that can effect the ending. We players come here not for that. We are here for story, for hidden blades , for the white and red hoods and aaaaall of it that makes assassins creed game unique . Now its gone. With the Odyssey. AC Origin was the best what happened since AC 4 . Shame on you guys. We don't need AC every year! TAKE YOUR TIME! no rush! Make a complete new story line full game experience like it was in first 3 parts and I'm sure you will get your fan army back. As of now, first time in my life,I didn't even finished watching the trailer.

phoenix-force411
06-12-2018, 01:51 AM
@NinjaBoyArijit It's not the satisfaction, but the consistency. While RPG elements are fine in AC, Odyssey contradicts the Animus's capabilities completely. We can all just assume this is a simulation created by Abstergo for entertainment, but if these are actual memories being relived by someone then all of the new features contradicts the Animus lore. I wanted to like Odyssey, but it doesn't seem like it's a game I will not pick up. I didn't pick up Origins because I'm just not a fan of the time period nor characters. But I guess I'm just burnt out on Ubisoft never getting out of the Juno Arc.

Ghost416
06-12-2018, 01:53 AM
I'm hyped for it. The gameplay I've seen so far looks fantastic and, like Origins, I love the period and setting. I do want to know just how deep of an RPG it's going to be, though.

dxsxhxcx
06-12-2018, 02:24 AM
It seems those historical tourism enthusiasts got the franchise they've always wanted, enjoy! It looks like a cool game just not an AC one, the little AC that it's still left in it is just there for convenience. Stop beating a dead horse Ubisoft, just drop the lore and capitalize on the premise of visiting different settings, there's no shame in that (in fact it would show some respect towards those who actually cared about the lore).


- Kassandra's personality feels odd as hell;
- Dialogue options seem kinda pointless and seem to be there just for the sake of it;
- Eagle's vision again, how convenient!
- I've disliked the shield from the get go in Origins but the game where IMO it would've made most sense it's nowhere to be seen.
- You don't even deny you've turned the game into a RPG;

Shrykull_the1st
06-12-2018, 02:59 AM
Assassin's Creed treats the eternal foolishness of man. Thus it keeps regressing to his origin until we experience something first hand from the civilization, which made man. Thither we go.

AnimusLover
06-12-2018, 03:11 AM
Just to address all the foot stomping and tantrum throwing: sometimes I think Ubisoft goes through these comments and just laughs at how short people's memories are.
You guys whined and complained about Origins during the first look, "ooooh, the combat sucks oooh, the animations are janky" and then when it came out you loved it and bought all the DLCs. Don't tell me that Odyssey marks the first true departure from the lore, that ship sailed (pun intended) around Black Flag when they started introducing random crap like the Sage and had you playing as an iPad. That is, when you were playing as a pirate that actively MURDERED ASSASSINS. That should have been your first clue.

In Origins, we didn't play as an Assassin until after the campaign had finished and it was very tacked on. You were a medjay - not an Assassin - in Egypt and the game, itself, even referred to you as such throughout (e.g. medjays did not kill civilians'). The only difference between Odyssey and Origins is that the devs here are far more honest about this not really being an Assassin's Creed game. They're also being more open in general, admitting that they were worried people would think they were rushing it after Origins only came out a few months ago (according to RadBrad) and they're talking more candidly about modern day (if only to offset the fact that there's a choice mechanic). I like the fact that they're not using the "this is alpha footage!" disclaimer/excuse anymore. Good on you Ubisoft for owning your presentations.

So in conclusion, if you're here complaining that "Odyssey isn't a true AC game" but had no problem with Origins then Ash and his team did a great job of manipulating you during the marketing campaign and you deserve everything you get. I gave up on the series being an Assassin's Creed game after the terrible story in Origins and have stopped being angry at this franchise for not being something it clearly has no intention of being anymore and have just learned to embrace it for what is where the story is concerned.

Now, my thoughts on what was shown at E3. I love it. Can't stop watching gameplay videos. I'm actually more into Ancient Greece than Egypt (Origins wasn't really Ancient Egypt anyway) because the mythology is more interesting to me. The art direction is stunning and the graphics are more photo realistic than Origins which looked too cartoonish at times and uneven in environmental detail. Odyssey is the best looking AC game to date by far. Here, everything has been improved including the facial models which has been this series' greatest weakness. It's a milestone for Ubisoft. Now, the graphical quality that has always been present in every AC world can now be seen in all its beautiful glory in the actual facial models of its characters. They have finally achieved the graphical pinnacle of Unity without compromising the game's performance, so it seems. Even Layla looks be improved from the little snippet I saw of her (yes Ubisoft, I caught that tehe). Hopefully, they won't downgrade it in subsequent patches...

According to RadBrad, the devs said they are most proud of Kassandra. Unlike Syndicate, it feels like this game was designed with her in mind rather than as a last minute tack on. In Syndicate you could tell that more work had gone into Jacob's model than Evie's. Kassandra looks well realised. I'm definitely playing as her on my first playthrough.

The combat looks more refined, less sloppy than Origins and like that there's more emphasis on parrying which was actually harder than the shield because you had to do it perfectly... so expect to die a lot!

The choice mechanic seems great so far - I've already seen at least three different ways how meeting Kyra and her male companion can play out which is promising.
You can also kill civilians now but there's a notoriety bar like ACII which sends bounty hunters after you which should be interesting.

I was right about the multiple save slots. 'Quick save' gave it away. I just hope they've only implemented this so players can undo their decisions rather than to guard against game breaking bugs...

I was also right about the game not releasing in March. (Told ya, cawatrooper9)

Music during dialogue scenes totally sounds like the Witcher 3...

The 'you died' instead of 'desynchronised' did not go unnoticed by me. Is Layla making these choices?

My only negative is the return of the eagle/drone. They've copied and pasted this mechanic across all of their games of late and it's old hat. In this case it's literally the same mechanic i.e. locating targets and increasing perception via synchronisation viewpoints. Really lame. Also sceptical of the 'conquer plunder' loop that's present in just about most Far Cry games. Apparently, you have to lower a tyrant's regional influence via side activities in order to weaken him at his fortress before taking him down a la every open world Ubisoft game of late. Again, lame.


Overall though, quite brilliant. I can't wait to play it in October!

Shrykull_the1st
06-12-2018, 03:25 AM
The eagle in Origins was one of my most appreciated novelties. To freely fly everywhere? Uau... Loved it (always loved some cheat free fly on games). Certainly it would please not to feel it copy pasted from Origins.

Alakazou
06-12-2018, 03:32 AM
Do anyone know it the tomb will come back. I mean it could be nice to see some mycenean stuff.

adster01
06-12-2018, 03:48 AM
this is no assassins creed game there is no brother hood and no hidden blade no templars the brother hood was not formed till some 350 years later how can u call this AC, no to mention having to pick responses in conversations is the dumbest thing ever that is not what AC is about. as a loyal and long time fan ive been playing AC since AC1 came out and have loved every game i have the Assassin Symbol tattooed on my back, but this is extremely disappointing UBISOFT i hope you see this you need to scrap this and start over or at the very least change the name make it not an AC game

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 04:12 AM
Assassin's Creed as a franchise is more than just the Brotherhood or hidden blades. It's also about a precursor race that hasn't really got much acknowledgement since 3. Included with that, are Pieces of Eden, which while are in most of the games, even as of the latest game, Origins, it's still not something that hasn't been touched on much in regards to anything other than an Apple.

That being said, the POE existed longer than any "creed" did, and since the Animus can relive anyone's memories that are not in your own genetic line, it's feasible to say that DNA would be found that is indicative of not belonging to any "order" that has some sort of name tagged on it.

The premise is still the same. Much like Darius, who chose to rise up against Xerxes, this is something that can tell a similar story without attaching a name to it.

In addition, this is apparently going to be focused more on Modern Day as well, continuing Layla's story.

So yes, it is still Assassin's Creed. It will still play as such. You just won't have a hidden blade unless they tie Darius to in the game somehow.

Again, Assassin's Creed is more than just hidden blades. It has a story that is rarely touched upon which is other Pieces of Eden, Modern Day and the Precursor Race.

r0bb1e34
06-12-2018, 04:13 AM
I keep seeing people posting no hood. This is not the case, the option of a hood does exist. There also seems to be the conclusion being drawn that the hidden blade is gone. Again not entirely true. In origins the hidden blade Bayek uses is the blade used to kill Xerxes the good king. That blade was then turned into a hidden blade. I'm not sure if this is that same weapon or a similar idea but it will probably become a hidden blade by the end of the game.

What's killing me the most is that we are promised historical accuracy and player choice......and then they take shields out of the players arsenal......dafuq?!

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 04:18 AM
I keep seeing people posting no hood. This is not the case, the option of a hood does exist. There also seems to be the conclusion being drawn that the hidden blade is gone. Again not entirely true. In origins the hidden blade Bayek uses is the blade used to kill Xerxes the good king. That blade was then turned into a hidden blade. I'm not sure if this is that same weapon or a similar idea but it will probably become a hidden blade by the end of the game.

What's killing me the most is that we are promised historical accuracy and player choice......and then they take shields out of the players arsenal......dafuq?!

The blade used to kill Xerxes was a hidden blade. Darius is the first in recorded history to assassinate him with it.

I agree with most everything else though.

r0bb1e34
06-12-2018, 04:31 AM
The blade used to kill Xerxes was a hidden blade. Darius is the first in recorded history to assassinate him with it.

I agree with most everything else though.

Don't think they ever actually said it was a hidden blade. I'm actually kinda hoping that the spear of Leonidas is the weapon that Darius used in which case it's also bayeks hidden blade and that would be dope.
But seriously SHIELDS. How is the protagonist in Odyssey supposed to be a part of a phalanx or block arrows or take cover on the trireme!!!!! This so messing with me. A Spartan without a shield isn't a Spartan.

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 04:35 AM
Don't think they ever actually said it was a hidden blade. I'm actually kinda hoping that the spear of Leonidas is the weapon that Darius used in which case it's also bayeks hidden blade and that would be dope.
But seriously SHIELDS. How is the protagonist in Odyssey supposed to be a part of a phalanx or block arrows or take cover on the trireme!!!!! This so messing with me. A Spartan without a shield isn't a Spartan.

It is a hidden blade. It says so in AC2.

r0bb1e34
06-12-2018, 04:40 AM
Assassin's Creed as a franchise is more than just the Brotherhood or hidden blades. It's also about a precursor race that hasn't really got much acknowledgement since 3. Included with that, are Pieces of Eden, which while are in most of the games, even as of the latest game, Origins, it's still not something that hasn't been touched on much in regards to anything other than an Apple.

That being said, the POE existed longer than any "creed" did, and since the Animus can relive anyone's memories that are not in your own genetic line, it's feasible to say that DNA would be found that is indicative of not belonging to any "order" that has some sort of name tagged on it.

The premise is still the same. Much like Darius, who chose to rise up against Xerxes, this is something that can tell a similar story without attaching a name to it.

In addition, this is apparently going to be focused more on Modern Day as well, continuing Layla's story.

So yes, it is still Assassin's Creed. It will still play as such. You just won't have a hidden blade unless they tie Darius to in the game somehow.

Again, Assassin's Creed is more than just hidden blades. It has a story that is rarely touched upon which is other Pieces of Eden, Modern Day and the Precursor Race.

And on top of all that the gods of Greece and Rome are the surviving entities of the precurser race, which suggests the Greeks and Romans knew more about the mythos for Assassin's Creed than anyone. This is huge play for Ubisoft in advancing the lore of the game.

AnimusLover
06-12-2018, 04:47 AM
this is no assassins creed game there is no brother hood

Oh, you mean like Origins?

Seriously, am I going to have to listen to so-called fans who probably liked a pirate and medjay game whining and complaining about Odyssey not being a "real AC game" for the next 5 months? And can the mods merge such threads please so all this tantrum throwing doesn't take up the entire page?

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 04:48 AM
And on top of all that the gods of Greece and Rome are the surviving entities of the precurser race, which suggests the Greeks and Romans knew more about the mythos for Assassin's Creed than anyone. This is huge play for Ubisoft in advancing the lore of the game.

Very good point! Hype rising!

Stedmister
06-12-2018, 06:04 AM
Source on moden day being more in the game?

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 06:22 AM
Source on moden day being more in the game?

Kotaku

shobhit7777777
06-12-2018, 07:36 AM
Assassin's Creed as a franchise is more than just the Brotherhood or hidden blades. It's also about a precursor race that hasn't really got much acknowledgement since 3. Included with that, are Pieces of Eden, which while are in most of the games, even as of the latest game, Origins, it's still not something that hasn't been touched on much in regards to anything other than an Apple.


That's lovely and all, but the core of AC...the core of any game lies in the gameplay and art, because that is what defines and drives the moment to moment experience. It's a popular opinion that the modern day narrative and all the precursor nonsense (Well, IMO it is nonsense) gets in the way of historically accurate sneaky stabbing.

Art - visual and aural - is subjective to a great extent and we've seen a wide range of changes to the series in this regard. Sure, they checklist certain items like iconic sounds and visual signatures, but by and large this has been rather fluid within the franchise. So I don't really mind the tonal shifts.

Gameplay - it's been consistent by and large, up till Origins. I have no doubts that Origins and even Odyssey will be fun, well made games, but the attachment of the 'Assassin's Creed' tag does come with certain expectations, for a segment of the playerbase. I can certainly speak for myself and tell you that this (Origins and Odyssey's design direction) is the farthest thing from what I want in an AC game.

I couldn't care much about the non-historical narrative, but I did enjoy the urban ninja gameplay and "social" stealth the series offered. It's become an action-RPG, not what I want from this particular franchise, because there are others that scratch that itch.

XxHunterHxX
06-12-2018, 07:42 AM
Em i the only one that looked at the lipsinc and realized it was wayyyyyyyyyyy off and no hoodie ? no ac blades nothing relly.....they killed it its finaly done

Erathiel
06-12-2018, 07:46 AM
It looks great, better than I first thought! Can't wait for October!

Vemand
06-12-2018, 07:56 AM
What the actual f...? Greek setting and greek warfare but no use of shields for the player? This makes no sence! Absolutely not gonna buy this game until they add shields.

xYLeinen
06-12-2018, 08:35 AM
Hey everyone, I'm a sucker for the Assassin's Creed series and have always been. I loved the latest installment tho I felt it got a bit away from the whole assassin and stealth gameplay.

After watching a lot of gameplay for Odyssey I'm turned off. Why not just create a new IP and make that IP an action RPG instead of using the Assassin's Brand? After the release of Origins Ubi said they learned from the break from Assassin's Creed annual release and now they are doing it again, and it's not even Assassin's Creed. Judging from the available gameplay this is a moderate re-skin from Origins and some new implemented RPG elements. We don't even have the hidden blades anymore, but a "legendary" dagger.

I'm not saying Odyssey will be bad or anything as a game, what I'm saying it's NOT Assassin's Creed.

BlobfisherJr
06-12-2018, 09:25 AM
The E3 trailers really dropped my expectations for the game, but I don't rant it
and post false information on the forums because of some small footage and cinematics. Instead, I looked into it and as a fan of Origins, I truly believe this will be even better.

Nobody seems to have mentioned that we in Odyssey have our own ship and crew just like Black Flag, fully customizable. The map is twice as big as Origins, so you both can explore the sea, the main land, and the archipelago.

It is also obvious that they focus on the rpg aspect of the game. Do you want to be the "assassin" (not a real one), roleplay as one. Equip the hood, kill your targets from the shadows, stealth gameplay has been improved since Origins. You don't have to wear a helmet or rush into battle if that isn't the gameplay you seek. You don't have to be a woman if that isn't the character you want to be. We've never had an Assassin's creed this far back in history, it's obvious that we won't have the equipment (Hidden blade, or maybe we get it at the end of the game?) or
the brotherhood (Bayek and Aya started it) that we've had in earlier installements. Personally, I just think this is interesting and I'm looking forward how they built the story without these.

But I understand why people don't see this as an Assassin's creed anymore, you aren't one but we weren't in Origins either. The story fits Assassin's creed though, you wear a piece of Eden as your main weapon, the plot includes family revenge alike Ezio and Bayek's and the backstory of the first civilization. Still, this is very different and I understand if people do not like the change.

TheGeekAssassin
06-12-2018, 09:35 AM
I wholeheartedly agree with you. They created Assassins Creed as a separate IP from Prince of Persia, even though it was initially supposed to be a POP game. And I get that franchises evolve but it seems that as the game is evolving it is just stepping away from its roots and like you said should become a new IP as well. Calling it Assassin's Creed gives it instant name recognition and therefore built in marketing. What might be worrisome is that had they created another IP based of of AC perhaps Assassin's creed would no longer exist much like how prince of persia was discontinued. It's funny how they created Skull and Bones because of the success of AC 4, why not do something similar for what odyssey is.

The thing I find interesting Is the time period. We already know that there are some Assassin's Creed ties to Greece with The first hidden blade being used to Kill Xerxes and Alexander the Great succumbing to an untimely end at the hands of someone held in high esteem to the brotherhood but why the Peloponnesian war? It is a great backdrop for a game but seems to ignore what has already been established in the franchise.

I also find it interesting how through today's Ubisoft conference they talked about getting community feedback and the involving the community on their other games. But it seems like when it came to Assassin's Creed they do what they want and damned be the fans. To say the game is an assassin's creed game because it follows the modern day story is laughable. We hardmey play the modern day story and since Desmond and even then, these sequences pull you of of the game. But if the idea is that we can just use the animus to check out any point in history unrelated to the brotherhood then it is hardly Assassin's Creed anymore. Hell have it be in the assassins creed universe but some sort of offshoot where you have the opportunity it to be a templar or any historical figure or time period. But I guess since the most time played in any AC game was in origins I guess the people have spoken.

All of this being said, it does look like an impressive and entertaining game, I am looking forward to playing it, I just feel like it didn't need to be called Assassin's Creed.

timpbader
06-12-2018, 10:35 AM
I keep reading everywhere that this game while beautiful is one major disappointment. The reaction to E3 was not good.

timpbader
06-12-2018, 10:37 AM
It looks like a great game but a piss poor Assassins Creed game.

timpbader
06-12-2018, 10:39 AM
This is NO Assassins Creed game. And I don't see how it could be fixed in time. Gameplay cutscenes would all have to be reworked!

I wholeheartedly agree with you. They created Assassins Creed as a separate IP from Prince of Persia, even though it was initially supposed to be a POP game. And I get that franchises evolve but it seems that as the game is evolving it is just stepping away from its roots and like you said should become a new IP as well. Calling it Assassin's Creed gives it instant name recognition and therefore built in marketing. What might be worrisome is that had they created another IP based of of AC perhaps Assassin's creed would no longer exist much like how prince of persia was discontinued. It's funny how they created Skull and Bones because of the success of AC 4, why not do something similar for what odyssey is.

The thing I find interesting Is the time period. We already know that there are some Assassin's Creed ties to Greece with The first hidden blade being used to Kill Xerxes and Alexander the Great succumbing to an untimely end at the hands of someone held in high esteem to the brotherhood but why the Peloponnesian war? It is a great backdrop for a game but seems to ignore what has already been established in the franchise.

I also find it interesting how through today's Ubisoft conference they talked about getting community feedback and the involving the community on their other games. But it seems like when it came to Assassin's Creed they do what they want and damned be the fans. To say the game is an assassin's creed game because it follows the modern day story is laughable. We hardmey play the modern day story and since Desmond and even then, these sequences pull you of of the game. But if the idea is that we can just use the animus to check out any point in history unrelated to the brotherhood then it is hardly Assassin's Creed anymore. Hell have it be in the assassins creed universe but some sort of offshoot where you have the opportunity it to be a templar or any historical figure or time period. But I guess since the most time played in any AC game was in origins I guess the people have spoken.

All of this being said, it does look like an impressive and entertaining game, I am looking forward to playing it, I just feel like it didn't need to be called Assassin's Creed.

ericdyy
06-12-2018, 11:31 AM
Excited for the game, though I hope there will be shields... The figthing style showed in gameplay trailer feels like a copy of shadow of morder... a "regular weapon" and a broken spear.

Kiroku
06-12-2018, 11:42 AM
I guess I will give it a try in october.

First point for me is the setting which I like more than egypt which was stunning too.

Second point for me is indeed the RPG-Style. I know a lot of people doesnt like that direction but when playing black flag unity and syndicate it always felt a bit empty. Such big open worlds and so many possibilities to tell good stories but they never used it as they could have. Thats why I thought if they go for such vast open worlds why not going for an RPG AC game at least? Complaining about the animus problem with decision making in the game makes no sense to me. We as the player already decide how we play the game by maybe not clearing every point of interest and not doing all the side quests. If the animus goes for 100% recreation of the life of an ancestor dont we have to play every AC game for 100% then and exactly how the ancestor lived? But decision making with the new RPG element is off the lore? I dont get this. If the outcome of the character we play doesnt change at the end of the main story line its fine since we dont play every ancestor until he dies which means if at the end of the game hes still alive who knows what he goes for in the rest of his life?

Third point is that I already played every AC game and I just have to know if maybe one day the whole modern day story can finally find an end or maybe at least finally goes on with odyssey right now.

Ofc there is no hidden blade and that makes 10000% sense if its not even created yet! Maybe we will meet Darius or someone else and how they create the hidden blade for the first time?

Its not the good old AC game anymore and it will never be again. People have to understand that and look at the franchise as what it is right now. Everything changes. And if future AC games take place at times like Unity etc. again we will have our full armed master assassin back.

DrinkinMehStella
06-12-2018, 11:53 AM
just so disappointed :(

dxsxhxcx
06-12-2018, 12:24 PM
Complaining about the animus problem with decision making in the game makes no sense to me. We as the player already decide how we play the game by maybe not clearing every point of interest and not doing all the side quests. If the animus goes for 100% recreation of the life of an ancestor dont we have to play every AC game for 100% then and exactly how the ancestor lived?

The animus recreates the environment of the memory based on the ancestor's DNA but it give us enough freedom to interact with it as we see fit as long as we meet certain requirements such as the mission's checkpoints (that may or may not trigger an event like a cutscene) or its final objective, it doesn't matter if we decide to go full warrior or pacifist mode as long as we reach the point we are supposed to, unless the animus strictly says so like when we had those missions where we would be desynchronized if we were spotted, but that has more to do with synchronization (another thing that was dropped and doesn't matter anymore) than how the animus operates, what we do about the rest of the mission doesn't matter, the only moments that are 100% accurate with what happened in the past are the cutscenes and dialogue.

Dialogue options on the other hand go directly against the nature of the animus, it's one thing to give the user enough freedom to do as he/she pleases inside an emulation as long as certain criteria are met but shape the course of events based on different dialogue options (that may never have been said by the ancestor) is a whole different story, we are actively shaping the past by choosing one option over the other since what we say may have different consequences. AC' story already is convoluted enough as it is.

quanzaizai
06-12-2018, 12:36 PM
I still wondering how they handle block system since the LB is changed to skill select button (in ACO LB is guard stand), some people cant time the parry right and it would be ridiculous if they have to jumping round all the time. I see that only when you locked on the target you can go backward

Kiroku
06-12-2018, 12:42 PM
The animus recreates the environment of the memory based on the ancestor's DNA but it give us enough freedom to interact with it as we see fit as long as we meet certain requirements such as the mission's checkpoints (that may or may not trigger an event like a cutscene) or its final objective, it doesn't matter if we decide to go full warrior or pacifist mode as long as we reach the point we are supposed to, unless the animus strictly says so like when we had those missions where we would be desynchronized if we were spotted, but that has more to do with synchronization (another thing that was dropped and doesn't matter anymore) than how the animus operates, what we do about the rest of the mission doesn't matter, the only moments that are 100% accurate with what happened in the past are the cutscenes and dialogue.

Dialogue options on the other hand go directly against the nature of the animus, it's one thing to give the user enough freedom to do as he/she pleases inside an emulation as long as certain criteria are met but shape the course of events based on different dialogue options (that may never been said by the ancestor) is a whole different story, we are actively shaping the past by choosing one option over the other since what we say may have different consequences. AC' story already is convoluted enough as it is.

Damn thanks for the clarification. I played all the games and still never tried to see it from another perspective.

I guess you are right by the animus districtions and I can see the point now. I would like to see how they solved this conflict in the final game actually. A propper solution would be to maybe not use the animus as we know it this time. A new animus wouldnt make sense if we can manipulate history by decision making in the game then. But maybe the dialogues we can choose wont affect the outcome as much as we think and the main outcome at the and will still be the same and unchangable?

dxsxhxcx
06-12-2018, 12:51 PM
Damn thanks for the clarification. I played all the games and still never tried to see it from another perspective.

I guess you are right by the animus districtions and I can see the point now. I would like to see how they solved this conflict in the final game actually. A propper solution would be to maybe not use the animus as we know it this time. A new animus wouldnt make sense if we can manipulate history by decision making in the game then. But maybe the dialogues we can choose wont affect the outcome as much as we think and the main outcome at the and will still be the same and unchangable?

If I'm not wrong they've already said that Layla's animus is different and can change the past (hence the dialogue options), they could easily explain that with a POE but AC' story already is a mess as it is, so is this really necessary?

javiverona
06-12-2018, 01:18 PM
We will be playing in an era when the hidden blade had already been used, but I still don't get why there is so much hate towards Odyssey. I mean, everyone says that it is disconnected from the saga because there are no hoods or no hidden blades or no "true assassins", reading that I think, well, what about AC IV? it was also like that, no assassin elements apart from the hidden blades until the end of the game.

Kiroku
06-12-2018, 01:30 PM
If I'm not wrong they've already said that Layla's animus is different and can change the past (hence the dialogue options), they could easily explain that with a POE but AC' story already is a mess as it is, so is this really necessary?

For some people its still important to understand how things are possible. But I guess when playing Layla they will somehow explain how it works.

And for all those who think you cant wear a hood take a look at minute 35:23 where you can choose between helmet and a hood.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXtO1BVvs0o

Edit: There is also the ability to whistle when in a brush to attract enemies to your position again.

sarbazevije
06-12-2018, 01:37 PM
Assassin's Creed has long been dead. It's beyond belief they've now introduced an entirely new IP based on an AC game that itself was really just a pirate game and not Assassin's Creed at all. Bizarrely enough Odyssey is then a clone of Skull & Bones with some Greek Mythology thrown in it. I'm just bewildered by all of this! Copy paste rampaging through Ubisoft while the games' lore and core elements of their universe are also completely destroyed. This is more excruciating for us Tom Clancy fans.

dxsxhxcx
06-12-2018, 01:44 PM
We will be playing in an era when the hidden blade had already been used, but I still don't get why there is so much hate towards Odyssey. I mean, everyone says that it is disconnected from the saga because there are no hoods or no hidden blades or no "true assassins", reading that I think, well, what about AC IV? it was also like that, no assassin elements apart from the hidden blades until the end of the game.

People call it Pirate's Creed for a reason, that didn't go unnoticed at the time. The reason for the hate I believe it's the fact that Ubisoft has been dragging the story out for so long and dropping lore elements left and right as if they were nothing that AC is losing more and more of its identity each new game they release. People are well aware that the game is set before the foundation of the Order as we know but the lack of familiar elements (and I'm not talking about the hidden blade or the hood, that still is in the game btw) that tie this game with what made AC what it is (or used to be) certainly don't give them confidence specially because of how Ubisoft has been handling the lore in the last years (or I dare to say since the annualization started).

quanzaizai
06-12-2018, 02:03 PM
I think they are explaining how layla's animus can actually change the past now, as mention many times in ACO when you activate some special tomb

ModernWaffle
06-12-2018, 02:16 PM
We will be playing in an era when the hidden blade had already been used, but I still don't get why there is so much hate towards Odyssey. I mean, everyone says that it is disconnected from the saga because there are no hoods or no hidden blades or no "true assassins", reading that I think, well, what about AC IV? it was also like that, no assassin elements apart from the hidden blades until the end of the game.

Just look at the cover of Black Flag and Odyssey. They're both games trying to deviate from an older AC formula but the main difference is when Black Flag was released Ubisoft still wanted it be recognised as AC hence why Edward's hooded figure is seen so prominently. The removal of the hood as a default costume is in many ways trivial, but it is a good indicator of how Ubisoft is thinking (i.e. moving even further away from familiar AC icons).

I mean at least they're being relatively transparent here but surely you can understand how some people are still angry at this change, there's definitely a feeling of disproportionate incentive for money grabbing over creating a game that has some shred of its identity left.

javiverona
06-12-2018, 02:17 PM
I agree with you, I just hope they know what they are doing and that we don't get another Unity scenario.

Khaos004
06-12-2018, 02:30 PM
ACIV, you're not an Assassin until well until into the game. Rogue, you're a Templar for most of it. Origins, you're not really an Assassin until the very end. It will be OK. All this hate so soon is really depressing and annoying. The game couldn't stay the same forever. There were big changes from the series when Origins came out, changes I thought I was going to hate. But it was fine. Just different. Stop all the whining.

RVSage
06-12-2018, 02:58 PM
If what they are saying about modern day and first civilization is true, I am very much in for it , hope they do not disappoint , They have never marketed modern day from the get go. But then I feel, it is because they know, for this installment assassin order/ templar order is not the focus.

Helforsite
06-12-2018, 03:13 PM
As many have said, its seems like a great RPG, but probably not the best Assassin's Creed game.

I have also noticed that people's understanding of how the Animus works and what Origins First Civilization tombs revealed seems rather limited.
Now, I would actually prefer a more linear story for Assassin's Creed, but decision making is possible in the Animus since the heavy adherence to how your Ancestor did things was only to further Synchronization which you needed to continue to experience later memories, which is a focal point in multiple of the games.
Layla's Animus already allows her to experience the memories of people not related to her, making it more than possible that her Animus doesn't require as high a degree of Synchronization to unlock memories than other versions of the Animus.
Origins also introduces the idea that our current AC canon timeline is just one of multiple simulations run by the Isu in search for a solution to the Solar Flares, meaning that decision making in Assassin's Creed Odyssey could simply be explained as that.
TL;DR Decision-making in AC is actually lore compliant, both Animus and otherwise

I am also really intrigued with them mentioning Modern Day and saying there is more than in Origins, but remain cautious.

crakent_23
06-12-2018, 03:21 PM
The main part of AC is the story and with the new "dialogue options" and "character option" it haven't a true story, the game needs a main story, a main character, etc. Assassin's creed Odyssey haven't a main story, who is the real main character? the man or the woman?
I hope that the comunity follow me and say to Ubi to change it, knowing that it is the only update of odyssey from origins. IT ISN'T ASSASSIN'S CREED, AC IS A GOOD STORY, A GOOD MAIN STORY.
Thanks for reading.

Tartaluxos
06-12-2018, 03:27 PM
How can you said that ? "This is not an AC game".
Did you play the game ? NO
Did you see all the things/features in it ? I don't think so.
People with this kind of thinking makes me laught just because they spoke MONTHES earlier than the release date and earlier than the entire reveal/personnal game experience.
If UBI did the same things than the others AC : people complains. If they change things and worked hard to bring us some fresh things and/or something brand new to make us feel "yeah its finally new, thanks !" : people still complain.

Just stop bashing this game and they works/effort and go to play AC1 on Ps3 if you are as nostalgic as you shout.

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 03:38 PM
That's lovely and all, but the core of AC...the core of any game lies in the gameplay and art, because that is what defines and drives the moment to moment experience. It's a popular opinion that the modern day narrative and all the precursor nonsense (Well, IMO it is nonsense) gets in the way of historically accurate sneaky stabbing.

"Popular" is such a loose word. Fans have been complaining about modern day for years. Fans have also been clamoring about modern day for years. I myself want more modern day. They're the reason these games continue from a narrative standpoint.

In addition, according to Kotaku the modern day can be ignored a bit more if you want to. They're trying to please to both crowds and for the longest time, MD has been widely ignored. Time to bring it back.



Gameplay - it's been consistent by and large, up till Origins. I have no doubts that Origins and even Odyssey will be fun, well made games, but the attachment of the 'Assassin's Creed' tag does come with certain expectations, for a segment of the playerbase. I can certainly speak for myself and tell you that this (Origins and Odyssey's design direction) is the farthest thing from what I want in an AC game.

Origins has grown on me. But I didn't care for it first either. Experimenting can be both a good and a bad thing, and this seems like the perfect time and place to do it, especially if there is a narrative behind it. We already know that there is an explanation on your character choice and how it works with the Animus.

As for the rest of the gameplay, it's still there. Stealth, parkour, combat. It's refined over the years to fit the narrative. Are there some things in the RPG elevement that I don't care for? Absolutely. But it's still the same stabbing,


I couldn't care much about the non-historical narrative, but I did enjoy the urban ninja gameplay and "social" stealth the series offered. It's become an action-RPG, not what I want from this particular franchise, because there are others that scratch that itch.

That's still there, at least the urban ninja part. Social stealth is still gone, but again, both Origins and Ody take place in a time period where such a thing wasn't considered.

If you're hoping to be able to go crazy on a bunch of guards at once and on a murder spree doing chain kills, that apparently has improved since Origins and combat is more fluid and fun, at least according to the article at Kotaku.


I keep reading everywhere that this game while beautiful is one major disappointment. The reaction to E3 was not good.

Based on what? The crowd was cheering, people were wanting it, preorders for the Pantheon Edition of Xbox One have already sold out.

This, as Khaos and AnimusLover mentioned, is all the same song and dance and then they still buy it.

Ghost416
06-12-2018, 04:01 PM
Apparently, you have to lower a tyrant's regional influence via side activities in order to weaken him at his fortress before taking him down a la every open world Ubisoft game of late. Again, lame.
No lamer than Origins having us learn most targets' identities, locate them, and kill them all in one mission, though.

goonhill
06-12-2018, 04:11 PM
It’s a farce total reboot of Origins they UBISOFT spend a few $ to rip millions off its client base with cheap reboot

TheBluprint09
06-12-2018, 04:18 PM
I like these new stories of other heroes. The old apple of eden and Desmond stuff was getting boring. One thing id wish they'd go away from the way synchronization is done. I understand the eagle is the trademark/symbol of the assassins, but it's so darn annoying having to climb and watch the same sync cutscene over and over again.

Khaos004
06-12-2018, 04:24 PM
I find it's like music. Bands change styles, and some fans can't stand it. So you either learn to accept that the style has changed, or you ignore the new stuff and listen to the older albums. I've replayed the Ezio trilogy, Rogue, and I'm replaying Black Flag and Freedom Cry now. I'd love to play Unity and Syndicate again since it's been so long. The new games don't erase the old. They're still there to be enjoyed.

At first I hated Unity and Syndicate because the controls were different, and I hated that Arno had a pulse instead of static Eagle Vision. I sucked it up.

As MnemonicSyntax knows well, there were MONTHS of complaining about Origins, including the shade of the colours and other ridiculous aesthetic nitpicking. Even after Ubisoft made numerous changes in response. So I'll take all the current complaints with a ton of salt. Seems some people will never be happy. If you need Assassin purity so bad, replay ACII.

r0bb1e34
06-12-2018, 04:26 PM
It is a hidden blade. It says so in AC2.


What the actual f...? Greek setting and greek warfare but no use of shields for the player? This makes no sence! Absolutely not gonna buy this game until they add shields.

Thank you!!! Like who thought that was a good idea

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 04:31 PM
A few things:

This was made alongside Origins and had a three-plus year development time.

There is still stealth combat, hoods, etc. You just use a different weapon for stealth kills.

This story is tied more into modern day, pieces of eden and the precursor race, all which have been neglected in the past few games mostly.

cawatrooper9
06-12-2018, 04:39 PM
I'm not sure if this is necessarily where it's going (https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/06/12/heres-why-there-are-no-assassins-in-assassins-creed-odyssey/#3926507d5a97), but it's some interesting food for thought.

At the very least, I think there are options.

Khaos004
06-12-2018, 04:41 PM
@goonhiil. They can't rip you off if you don't buy it. So don't.

Swailing
06-12-2018, 04:54 PM
Looks great.

I expect that I will enjoy this game immensely, but I would welcome a return to a political intrigue instead of a war at some point. I glaze over when I meet someone who claims to be into history when they're really into wars, and AC turned into That Guy a long time ago.

But on the bright side, the new branching story choices could be the perfect development to get into the kind of setting and story that I want.

Paragon V7
06-12-2018, 05:06 PM
I'm so surprised with many negative comments. I think people are presuming way to much regarding the story, surely there will be a solid connection to the Assassin's Creed Universe. I think this game looks amazing, sincerely love the introduction of choice regarding the main protagonist - Kassandra looks great! - and dialogue choices, plus romances... Graphics are unbelievable, can't wait to explore ancient Greece. I don't know man, I loved every little thing I saw, so much potential for another epic Assassin's Creed title. I can't wait to play this one.

Swailing
06-12-2018, 05:17 PM
Assassin's Creed games are made simultaneously with different teams accepting and handing over responsibility for different aspects of the games.

An extra year every time would be excellent for any game made by one by one: Dishonored, The Last of Us, and so on. Development of each AC game is roughly 4-5 years, so when we had that year break, they all got that extra year of development. If you included an extra year every year, some games would receive far too much development and some too little (because eventually you'd have to compress schedules again).

Also, in about 2-3 years we'll have the PS5/XB2 generation. It would not make much sense for a game to get 4 + 1 + 1 + 1 years of development when the hardware it would eventually launch on is as yet unknown. There needs to be a decent but optimally short development time on the game that finally launches for the next gen, so that it's flexible to be tuned to those new consoles' abilities.

NinjaBoyArijit
06-12-2018, 05:34 PM
Completely agree with you @Tartaluxos . But as you know some people will always cry & complain . I was happy with Origins settings & now will pre-order Odyssey bcoz I'm totally fine with AC Odyssey .

DipperPinse
06-12-2018, 05:44 PM
you knew the main character is Layla........ the MD was ALWAYS the main story of the series with the historical part being its own story you knew that how this is an AC game. If your just an casual fan that its ok but for me that Layla seams to have a more central role in this game means a lot PLUS they will NOT change a thing in 5 months like relay .....

Alakazou
06-12-2018, 05:54 PM
Development of each AC game is roughly 4-5 years, so when we had that year break, they all got that extra year of development.


More like 3 years. Only origins take more time to make. But it take 3 years to make an AC game.

Swailing
06-12-2018, 06:02 PM
More like 3 years. Only origins take more time to make. But it take 3 years to make an AC game.

It doesn't matter. The point is still the same: when we had the one year break, the next games for years to come also got an extra year. They can pause the series a couple of times per decade to have the same effect.

Grayfox-87-
06-12-2018, 06:12 PM
I love the new setting for these A.C. Game and it's again something new and fresh and Ian sure there is a other perspective to the AC Lore!

One thing that I have seen into these Gameplay footage and I don't like are: the Helmets (or the Headgear) are gone into the conversations between other NPC's.... these destroys a little bit the immersion for me - they should fix this before the Release (Origins made that perfect if you wear your Hood up)!

I also hope there will be a option to give Alexios a full Spartan Beard - this point is my biggest wish for this Game!

Alakazou
06-12-2018, 07:04 PM
I'm not sure if this is necessarily where it's going (https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/06/12/heres-why-there-are-no-assassins-in-assassins-creed-odyssey/#3926507d5a97), but it's some interesting food for thought.

At the very least, I think there are options.


I agree with the article. I mean the ennemy in AC odyssey, will be the cult of kosmos and Kosmos in ancient greek mean 3 things: universe, ornament and Order. If it's the origins of the order of the ancient or what we call the templar, it will make sense with the time period and what we know now. I mean this game will have a nation controle system.

timpbader
06-12-2018, 07:59 PM
Have they at least announced a delay yet to rework this disaster? Maybe freaking consult Ashraf Ismail.

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 08:01 PM
Have they at least announced a delay yet to rework this disaster? Maybe freaking consult Ashraf Ismail.

What disaster?

Kiroku
06-12-2018, 08:12 PM
I'm not sure if this is necessarily where it's going (https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/06/12/heres-why-there-are-no-assassins-in-assassins-creed-odyssey/#3926507d5a97), but it's some interesting food for thought.

At the very least, I think there are options.

If thats true then there are questions for me:

Both characters we can play are spartans right?

And they help sparta to get more influence in several territories right?

Doesnt that make them to templars at the end of the game according to the theories?

If yes it doesnt make sense to mee since it looks like they fight for freedom in the gameplay footage.

cawatrooper9
06-12-2018, 08:17 PM
If thats true then there are questions for me:

Both characters we can play are spartans right?

And they help sparta to get more influence in several territories right?

Doesnt that make them to templars at the end of the game according to the theories?

If yes it doesnt make sense to mee since it looks like they fight for freedom in the gameplay footage.

It's definitely just a theory, but who knows?

Kinda looked like Shay was fighting for freedom too, didn't it? ;)

Kiroku
06-12-2018, 08:44 PM
It's definitely just a theory, but who knows?

Kinda looked like Shay was fighting for freedom too, didn't it? ;)

Well thats fair enough ha!

Maybe the hatred will grow throughout the game until the feeling for revenge overcomes.

MageAquarius20
06-12-2018, 08:59 PM
It's good that they choose the Peleponnesian war, after all it's by far the most interesting era in Greek History. A refreshing sight to see them choose a setting that didn't get more coverage from the Media. It's better than what they did with Revenge 5( AC Origins). Revenge 5 was just arrogant in the notion that only Cleopatraīs story matters to Egyptian history cough Bronze age Egpyt cough .

Hopefully Alexiousīs story won't be like Revenge 5 and be actual interesting.

suchymisiaczek
06-12-2018, 09:10 PM
I'm very disappointed - I was with AC from first game and its propably ends now :( dialogue options, few different endings, character select option - its typical RPG games - I hate RPG games. Shame couse Origins was great and rpg parts were really good - but it was only parts not whole rpg game. I will miss you AC. I always love to learn new AC stories but I don't want to create it.I'm so disappointed

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 09:12 PM
I'm very disappointed - I was with AC from first game and its propably ends now :( dialogue options, few different endings, character select option - its typical RPG games - I hate RPG games. Shame couse Origins was great and rpg parts were really good - but it was only parts not whole rpg game. I will miss you AC. I always love to learn new AC stories but I don't want to create it.I'm so disappointed

The male/female selection is at least explained by having two sets of DNA apparently.

quanzaizai
06-12-2018, 09:21 PM
So far what I see in ACOD is very promissing but still I see some problem in the gameplay that I want to point it out:
1) push back distance: seem like in hands on edition the pushback distance is a bit too much ( shield break and kick) although the kick is acceptable for me, on the other hand the shield break look abit too much and it actually break the motion of the fight when your enemy fly 5 m away after u shield break them. Its very annoying and less cinematic.
2) as we all know and complain about in ACO lack of kill animation. ACOD does the same thing and even less when there is no sickle sword anymore probaly also barehand fighting.
3) they may remove the pop up of the skill interface when fighting. When people only trying to parry they unconciously hold to button too long and the skill set keep poping up and it really really annoying.
4) See no tomb or some short of replacement for tomb to explore. Maybe because they haven shown it in the demo yet.
5)bugs some time your character suddently flying around and glitchy. Well ots pre alpha demo
6)too much long dodging. Idont know if it had different key set now for long dodge and short dodge but I see people use long dodge all the time. If the longdodge is the only method then the combat system is completely f*** up because now they even remove the blocking system and force people too move.
I may wrong on the first point because maybe the far push back is a skill. But if it's then it need to be fixed

MageAquarius20
06-12-2018, 10:12 PM
Just to address all the foot stomping and tantrum throwing: sometimes I think Ubisoft goes through these comments and just laughs at how short people's memories are.

Wow, that's very harsh, i would agree with you, but the next paragraph makes more reculant to do so:


You guys whined and complained about Origins during the first look, "ooooh, the combat sucks oooh, the animations are janky" and then when it came out you loved it and bought all the DLCs. Don't tell me that Odyssey marks the first true departure from the lore, that ship sailed (pun intended) around Black Flag when they started introducing random crap like the Sage and had you playing as an iPad. That is, when you were playing as a pirate that actively MURDERED ASSASSINS. That should have been your first clue.

Actually AnimusLover it was long before that, it was during the time Brotherhood was finished, when Patrice was fired because he rightfully didnīt agree with Annulization, though i would argue that AC 2 did put the first nail of the Coffin. Thatīs why he was fired and the overall structure of the games were after Black flag much worse. the Sage thing was actually in Concept very good, having a Human with First Civ Knowledge was a pretty terrifying, yet engaging threat, exspecially how hositle he was. Murdering Assassis in the beginning isn't the biggest issue, because he didnīt knew he was in a middle between an ongoing Prehistoric war, what was his issue was his lack of respect for the Assassins and his overall naiveness that would make his descendants look Guile in Comparison


In Origins, we didn't play as an Assassin until after the campaign had finished and it was very tacked on. You were a medjay - not an Assassin - in Egypt and the game, itself, even referred to you as such throughout (e.g. medjays did not kill civilians'). The only difference between Odyssey and Origins is that the devs here are far more honest about this not really being an Assassin's Creed game. They're also being more open in general, admitting that they were worried people would think they were rushing it after Origins only came out a few months ago (according to RadBrad) and they're talking more candidly about modern day (if only to offset the fact that there's a choice mechanic). I like the fact that they're not using the "this is alpha footage!" disclaimer/excuse anymore. Good on you Ubisoft for owning your presentations.

Well Because it was supposed to be the Origin story of the Assassins like we know from the first game, not the overall creation of the Assassins, of course we wouldn't play a Assassin until he becomes one after realizing that all tyrants suck and that he will kill every single one of them...yeah i agree it was pretty garbage and i regret playing it. Yeah and that is good? Attacking the own fanbase like that? They as devs shouldn't fall down to the level of the same people, who are still angry that Ezio gets no game anymore. They shouldnīt even try to be so sensive of Criticism of these people, becasue if you give into too much criticism is also bad, because you won't be able to see BS Criticism like you know. They should hire professional writers with an clear understanding of the Matter, not hiring newbies with no knowledge on the stuff, this way they can imake good games like AC 1 and 3 again. All they got is the scorn of the fanbase yet again.


So in conclusion, if you're here complaining that "Odyssey isn't a true AC game" but had no problem with Origins then Ash and his team did a great job of manipulating you during the marketing campaign and you deserve everything you get. I gave up on the series being an Assassin's Creed game after the terrible story in Origins and have stopped being angry at this franchise for not being something it clearly has no intention of being anymore and have just learned to embrace it for what is where the story is concerned.

Well i was actually very indifferent with Origins, while i enjoy it to some degree, itīs plot was pretty limiting in terms of Potential. Yeah, the fans deserve what they always wanted: A History simulator with no AC lore in it, like the earlist of AC Critics always imagined it. Thatīs why i think Ancestors is going to destroy AC.


Now, my thoughts on what was shown at E3. I love it. Can't stop watching gameplay videos. I'm actually more into Ancient Greece than Egypt (Origins wasn't really Ancient Egypt anyway) because the mythology is more interesting to me. The art direction is stunning and the graphics are more photo realistic than Origins which looked too cartoonish at times and uneven in environmental detail. Odyssey is the best looking AC game to date by far. Here, everything has been improved including the facial models which has been this series' greatest weakness. It's a milestone for Ubisoft. Now, the graphical quality that has always been present in every AC world can now be seen in all its beautiful glory in the actual facial models of its characters. They have finally achieved the graphical pinnacle of Unity without compromising the game's performance, so it seems. Even Layla looks be improved from the little snippet I saw of her (yes Ubisoft, I caught that tehe). Hopefully, they won't downgrade it in subsequent patches...

Personally i find it boring. The trailer wasnīt imposing nor Epic, just filled with a soulless track and a terrible presentation of it. The art might be stunning but it looks way to similiar to AC Origins in order to be called unique as well as the facial animations that arenīt even stunning. Origins wasnīt Ancient Egypt because the devs were more interested in Rome than Egypt, which you can add as another reason to dislike Origins, however i absolutely disagree that Greek mythology is better, itīs pretty unsophisticated compared to those of the Oriental or Northern Mythologies like the Mesopotamian( the actual inspiration for the first Civ) and Norse Gods( who are actually flawed compared to the Greek gods). The Greek Gods are like Yahweh, but less impressive, they are no subject to Human ideas and pretty boring sometimes like Zeus, who only bangs Woman and insult Hera. No Greek considered them Flawed or questionable, only few did like Socrates, who died because he questioned them. Not to mention that Greek mythology is actually neo_Hittite Polytheism and not really unique.


According to RadBrad, the devs said they are most proud of Kassandra. Unlike Syndicate, it feels like this game was designed with her in mind rather than as a last minute tack on. In Syndicate you could tell that more work had gone into Jacob's model than Evie's. Kassandra looks well realised. I'm definitely playing as her on my first playthrough.

They are so proud that they didnīt even marketed her properly in the trainer and plays secound fiddle to the Male protagonists, so no they aren't so proud as you make it out to be. If they were, then we would have seen more of her already, i mean recycling the choice of playing a female or male hero, why not just make one female Assassin instead like a Korinthian spy, they were the most beautiful woman in Greece according to their writings after all.


Music during dialogue scenes totally sounds like the Witcher 3...

Like Alexious appereance, he looks like Mediterreanian Geralt.

Overall it's a discount AC Origins that took more influence from the Witcher than from AC, quite dissapointed but meh.

ouwssama
06-12-2018, 11:13 PM
I don’t know why Ubisfot still call this AC lol come on guys the last AC game was Syndicate.

let’s be honest, Origins yes is a fun game immersive world and beautiful graphics, but that’s not AC.

AC was about assassination, creed and stealth, planing before you kill the target create distractions and hide within crowds and pass throughout guards like nothing happened, you took all these stuff away and you still trying to convince me that Odyssey will be good ? i mean the title “Assassin’s Creed” has nothing to do with Odyssey.

the game is 100% RPG now, leveling up and fighting foes like a Dark Souls game?? someone please explain to me where is the Assassin Creed part in Odyssey and i’ll pre-order it right now.

don’t get me wrong I’m cool with change and improvements on the mechanics and gameplay, but changing the core concept of the game and still publish it as one of the series that’s ********, That’s litteraly fraud.

sarbazevije
06-12-2018, 11:30 PM
You guys need to check out Ghost of Tsushima. At E3 it made AC look like child's play. It's the authentic Assassin's Creed that never was!

MnemonicSyntax
06-12-2018, 11:52 PM
Edited.

Lysette88
06-13-2018, 12:13 AM
Well, well - I expected to find praise for the artwork,which this game actually is, and that it will most likely be as much fun to play as Origins, if not even more so. The team, who made Syndicate made this one, and Syndicate is by far my favorite AC game, so I will most likely enjoy Odyssey as well. I think as well, that a lot of the newer players do not care much about the present day story - I don't know, why we still have that at all - it brings nothing to the experience IMO. I like AC games for the beautiful settings and it's excellent parkour, fluent game play and combat, excellent voice acting, wonderful cut scenes and overall the whole setting of the game world - and I love that I can finally play with a female character, Kassandra, who's figure and looks are well designed, very natural and beautiful, but as well believable in her role as mercenary. She is certainly not a barbie doll, but still an attractive woman - it will be fun to discover more of her personality while playing the game.

I am really looking forward to it - and I don't really care about the pieces of Eden stuff anyway - I take it, when I have to, but otherwise, I couldn't care less. I buy and play AC games for their beauty and game play, not for the lore behind it. And that it is becoming more and more of an RPG is a good move IMO.

AnimusLover
06-13-2018, 04:01 AM
Actually AnimusLover it was long before that, it was during the time Brotherhood was finished, when Patrice was fired because he rightfully didnīt agree with Annulization, though i would argue that AC 2 did put the first nail of the Coffin. Thatīs why he was fired and the overall structure of the games were after Black flag much worse. the Sage thing was actually in Concept very good, having a Human with First Civ Knowledge was a pretty terrifying, yet engaging threat, exspecially how hositle he was. Murdering Assassis in the beginning isn't the biggest issue, because he didnīt knew he was in a middle between an ongoing Prehistoric war, what was his issue was his lack of respect for the Assassins and his overall naiveness that would make his descendants look Guile in Comparison

Missing the point. You're confusing 'quality' with what consitutes an AC game. Qualiity wise, the series has been on the decline since Revelations, yes, but whether the games are good or not is not what my post was about. I was referring purely to the lore and premise of the Assassins / Templar conflict which was still very present in Revelations despite the game, itself, being quite poor.

The introduction of the Sage was pointless. It made the plot more convoluted and was yet another way of tricking hardcore fans into thinking the story line was advancing when really it was Darby making up random nonsense as he went along. Additionally, you are not addressing my point regarding Edward. Edward killing Assassins because of ignorance is about a fictional character making a fictional decision in a fictional story. I don't care about that. What I was referring to was the decision making of the writers. Black Flag should not have contained the Assassin's Creed title or, at least, it shouldn't have been marketed as one. If they had been more candid and said "look guys, you're not playing as either side, you're a pirate with his own agenda caught in the middle" and called the game 'A Pirate's Creed' the I would have accepted it. Writers can tell whatever story they like. Just don't lie about it to your consumers. That's where Black Flag contrasts to Odyssey because even from the way the narrative director speaks about it she is not selling it as an AC game but a Ancient Greek game with some references to the First Civilisation. They're not going on about it being the origins of the Assassin every 5 minutes and paying lip service. It is what it is.


Well Because it was supposed to be the Origin story of the Assassins like we know from the first game, not the overall creation of the Assassins,

No, it was the Origin story of Bayek and that's not what was sold to fans during marketing. Ashraf pulled this same stunt during Black Flag's campaign. He doesn't seem to actually like the Assassin lore and instead opts to make historical epics and then tack on the Assassin element at the end so he can say, "See! It is an AC game because the protagonist does eventually become an Assassin!" The way the formation of the Creed happened came out of nowhere and was forced. Ubisoft are obsessed with getting new players on board which is why they refuse to move the story forward. Origins was yet another way of retelling the story from scratch, just like Black Flag.


Origins wasnīt Ancient Egypt because the devs were more interested in Rome than Egypt, which you can add as another reason to dislike Origins,

I agree here. It's clear the devs wanted to make a game about Greece or Rome instead. Also, the time period they chose technically isn't 'Ancient' Egypt anyway.


They are so proud that they didnīt even marketed her properly in the trainer and plays secound fiddle to the Male protagonists, so no they aren't so proud as you make it out to be. If they were, then we would have seen more of her already, i mean recycling the choice of playing a female or male hero, why not just make one female Assassin instead like a Korinthian spy, they were the most beautiful woman in Greece according to their writings after all.

You're confusing the developers with the marketing directors and they are not the same. I can guarantee that Ubisoft's marketing department would have pushed for the male character in the trailers in order to appease a certain demographic minority that hates women in anything significant... The devs are not the marketing team. Also, you conveniently leave out that the walkthrough they showed on stage in front of the entire world, as in the gameplay, itself,was all Kassandra...
From people who have played the game at E3, they all agree that Kassandra's animations and face model seem to have got more care than her brother's.

STDlyMcStudpants
06-13-2018, 04:18 AM
Assassin's Creed is my favorite series of all time.
I was in the forums this time last year tearing Origin apart.
I was wrong.
The changes made Origin my favorite AC game to play since AC3.
The RPG elements, the loot, the levels, the spongy enemies that make you come back later. The eagle to help scout locations.
I loved it.
It was leaked years ago that there will be a trilogy made in this style, so Im not surprised or disappointed that Odyssey looks like more of the same..

However more red flags are popping up.
Despite loving ACO.. the story took a major hit..
And I believe this time its going to take an even bigger hit with choices...
I get they are going for a Witcher 3 thing with this new direction..
But while Witcher might tell a bunch of great small stories in a massive world.. the big picture story is pretty mediocre...

Assassins Creed used to make me think.. run to the message boards with my theories...
but now I just run to it with complaints that it isnt what it used to be.

I can already tell that this wont be a special experience...
Is it just me, or are the combat animations plucked right from origins?
Yet every assassin up to this point has had their own flavor...

I dont like that personality is being stripped from our assassins witch choice etc....
I dont quite like choice in games that lack narrative focus

I was wrong about Origin so Ill trust...
But I just hope this is more of a test and you wait for feedback before you pack the 3rd game with all of this choice etc...

MLR_SPARCO
06-13-2018, 04:31 AM
Will get it but would much rather a main AC game based in Asia,I know this request has been beaten to death but I'm honestly surprised they haven't done it yet since it's been requested since the Ezio trilogy.

Wombles-_-
06-13-2018, 08:20 AM
I hope the modern day crap that has been in decline for a long time now, has went the same path as the dodo.

This one looks really good playing as a Spartan mercenary, couldn't be happier. Though It doesn't look like an Assassins Creed game, I could be wrong though only time will tell.

timpbader
06-13-2018, 11:01 AM
cool game piss poor AC game.

Kiroku
06-13-2018, 11:43 AM
I think somehow the devs should bring some clarification to the whole franchise and where it will go in the future. At least for those players and fans that still believe it will go back to the good old AC2 days which will never happen again. Maybe that helps them to finally understand that there will always be a change.

Am I by the way the only one thinking that Alexios looks a loot like Crixus from the Spartacus series? At least regarding the face.

ProdiGurl
06-13-2018, 12:24 PM
I LOVE how this looks so far... I've watched E3 every day, the 1st thing I said when I saw AC's trailer was "300!!!" :cool:
I like some VARIETY, it keeps a franchise from being stale & totally predictable.
Brotherhood may always be my favorite AC title... but Origins is at least tied with it (played it twice in a row). Greece is my 2nd favorite location after Egypt, so I'm in on it, period. I would LOVE if they brought back chain kills too.
Maybe Mercs can replace Origins' Phylakes concept as they're scattered thru the game hunting us down? Would LOVE that!! & I'd love some kind of Poison we could use too. I had too much fun using it in Origins.

The fighting looks great with new moves including that Sparta kick. The beach brawl looked awesome & I remember asking for more of those horde fests in previous games. Why are people saying Stealth is gone? I don't take a brief gameplay piece and base the entirety of a game on that as if what I don't see, doesn't exist. ??
& since it's set 400 yrs prior, it would be ok not having our usual assassin entrapments - we'll probly have some equally awesome weapons to that time period - maybe there WILL be a hidden blade... it's so early to condemn this based on what we've seen and haven't seen so far.

ProdiGurl
06-13-2018, 12:53 PM
Well, well - I expected to find praise for the artwork,which this game actually is, and that it will most likely be as much fun to play as Origins, if not even more so. The team, who made Syndicate made this one, and Syndicate is by far my favorite AC game, so I will most likely enjoy Odyssey as well. I think as well, that a lot of the newer players do not care much about the present day story - I don't know, why we still have that at all - it brings nothing to the experience IMO. I like AC games for the beautiful settings and it's excellent parkour, fluent game play and combat, excellent voice acting, wonderful cut scenes and overall the whole setting of the game world - and I love that I can finally play with a female character, Kassandra, who's figure and looks are well designed, very natural and beautiful, but as well believable in her role as mercenary. She is certainly not a barbie doll, but still an attractive woman - it will be fun to discover more of her personality while playing the game.

I am really looking forward to it - and I don't really care about the pieces of Eden stuff anyway - I take it, when I have to, but otherwise, I couldn't care less. I buy and play AC games for their beauty and game play, not for the lore behind it. And that it is becoming more and more of an RPG is a good move IMO.
THAT ^^
The more time passes & younger gamers get, the less they need to deal with present day anything from early AC. They aren't going to understand it without knowing the past games meanings, so are they going to be forced to buy/rent the early games to understand all of that?? I don't even remember any of it now, or care. Each new Assassin brings new things to each game to make them unique to that game - like the whole Pirate/ship thing was to Black Flag. It wasn't my thing, but it was a very good game.
Even in Origins which I adore, I had no clue what the messages meant from the people before? I'd let that play & go make some lunch lol
Just play the older games if you want that & Desmond. It was awesome & had its place, but I don't think it's going to go over well for newer AC fans coming in who have no idea what any of that meant 7 yrs ago.

Lastly, in the E3 gameplay seg, they're obviously going to be showing ACTION scenes for the show... people are running with a short clip they see as if it showcases the entire game & all you'll have in your arsenal.
??? The complaining blows my mind sometimes.
I

ColdBloodedVet
06-13-2018, 04:02 PM
We have seen 30 minutes of gameplay. That's hardly enough to conclude that this is not an AC game. Unlike most fans of the series, I'm excited about this new direction of the AC franchise. I don't like the dialog options so much as they don't tell the story of the ancestor assassin. And I miss the big assassination missions like the one from Unity where you stab the guy through the confession booth but I'm all for doubling down on making this an RPG. We still have eagle vison, parkour, close and ranged combat. There's still have modern day elements as well as first civ stuff and they are minimal enough that causal AC fans can ignore it and get back to the game. I've seen complaints about not having a hidden blade but remember that Bayek didn't start off with one. Darius killed Leonidus before this game takes place so we know that hidden blades exist. There's complaints about not having hoods. There are hoods in the game. I'll admit that social stealth is gone and I miss that too. This game has synch points so you know there will be leaps of faith. Kotaku has reported that this game will really delve into First Civ and modern day. Also there is a really good article on Forbes.com that theorizes that this game will show us the formation of the Order. That would be cool since we saw the formation of the Brotherhood in Origins. For me this game is still an AC game, Ubisoft just took the time to give it more depth. I have 180 hours in Origins because it was so much more than seven cycles of synch point, trail mission, steal some intel, rescue an informant then stab the Templar. What is an AC game? Is it sneak and stab for 12 hours or is it the story about the struggle between order and free will? I think once that is defined then the argument that fans have will go from "this is not an AC game" to "this doesn't play like an AC game." Then the argument will be valid. But why not wait until we get more info about the game before taking pitchforks to Ubi Quebec..

ColdBloodedVet
06-13-2018, 04:05 PM
Darius killed Xerxes not Leonidas. Small brain fart there..

Psycho_Saiyan
06-13-2018, 04:51 PM
ok ubisoft! i dont want any more of assassins creed! congrats you hav NOW offically killed it odyssey!

YOU STEAL IDEAS from witcher GAMEPLAY = get lvelling system, and ****!
WHERE IS THE ASSASSINATIONS and CREED??? wat happened to ezio-type games? IDIOTS
congrats on destroying the original fan club! yeah! get new fans coz u already have them! RPG-f**ing loving idiots! we chose the role already when we buy assassins creed.. coz it says "ASSASSINS" get it??? IDIOTS

PLEASE if YOU wanna redeem urself get back to THE original Assassins creed LIKE brotherhood, II or anything before origins

ouwssama
06-13-2018, 05:34 PM
While this game looks cool, does it really have anything to do with Assassin's Creed? Your character is a mercenary, not an assassin. The Assassins organization seems to have no presence, not even a stray insignia. They've replaced stealth and assassinations with pure combat. You don't have an Assassin's uniform or even appear to have a Hidden Blade.

It looks like a cool game, but not an AC game. You clearly want to have an RPG in ancient Greece, which is fine. Just make it stand alone game, or make a new franchise with a new name and move on, and stop riding the AC name for unrelated concepts. Don't throw a few Assassins related things in later to justify calling it Assassin's Creed when that's not the focus of the game, and not what it's about. It's one thing to take a franchise in new direction and another to ditch the original concept completely but keep the old, now-irrelevant, name.

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 06:40 PM
Le sigh.

Kiroku
06-13-2018, 07:04 PM
Damn does anyone know already if we are also able to own an island or something like a house we can renovate?

Like Black Flag or AC2 with income?

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 07:08 PM
As far as I know, the "ship" is our "base."

Kiroku
06-13-2018, 07:25 PM
As far as I know, the "ship" is our "base."

Yeah the ship is the one I heard of but it still would be super awesome if we could be able to build a base somewhere.

For example we free a specific island and can make it our home base too and renovate it. Time by time we then can maybe be invaded by enemies and fight at the beach. How cool would that be.

mehdy-25
06-13-2018, 07:25 PM
As a game: it looks gorgeous with a good open-world and a really fantastic Greece
As an Assassin's Creed: Well....it is not an Assassin's Creed but Ubisoft wanted it to be in the franchise and have the title. I don't know why and who came up with this idea I just wanna tell him you just ruined one of the greatest franchises in history.

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 07:27 PM
As a game: it looks gorgeous with a good open-world and a really fantastic Greece
As an Assassin's Creed: Well....it is not an Assassin's Creed but Ubisoft wanted it to be in the franchise and have the title. I don't know why and who came up with this idea I just wanna tell him you just ruined one of the greatest franchises in history.

Yes, by all means. Judge it before you've played it.

MageAquarius20
06-13-2018, 07:43 PM
Missing the point. You're confusing 'quality' with what consitutes an AC game. Qualiity wise, the series has been on the decline since Revelations, yes, but whether the games are good or not is not what my post was about. I was referring purely to the lore and premise of the Assassins / Templar conflict which was still very present in Revelations despite the game, itself, being quite poor.

I didnīt misunderstand anything here, If anything you Misunderstand me. All i did here was to correct you on how and where the AC series declined, and it's at the moment, where Patrice made AC Brotherhood and later got fired. Oh and quality does define a AC game, a AC has to have a certian amount of Qualities and overall richness of the plot in order to be considered amazing or even good and guess what, i was reffering to the Plotīs quality, not the gameplay like you seem to believe. The Games before Liberation were still quite decent enough in order to be considered AC games in terms of story, but they lost thier true touch, when Rougue came about. I agree that the stories we now have arenīt super amazing, i was correcting you on your point about the plot, and you just failed to get what i meant. No where did i talked about gameplay, where did you get that?


The introduction of the Sage was pointless. It made the plot more convoluted and was yet another way of tricking hardcore fans into thinking the story line was advancing when really it was Darby making up random nonsense as he went along. Additionally, you are not addressing my point regarding Edward. Edward killing Assassins because of ignorance is about a fictional character making a fictional decision in a fictional story. I don't care about that. What I was referring to was the decision making of the writers. Black Flag should not have contained the Assassin's Creed title or, at least, it shouldn't have been marketed as one. If they had been more candid and said "look guys, you're not playing as either side, you're a pirate with his own agenda caught in the middle" and called the game 'A Pirate's Creed' the I would have accepted it. Writers can tell whatever story they like. Just don't lie about it to your consumers. That's where Black Flag contrasts to Odyssey because even from the way the narrative director speaks about it she is not selling it as an AC game but a Ancient Greek game with some references to the First Civilisation. They're not going on about it being the origins of the Assassin every 5 minutes and paying lip service. It is what it is.

The Introduction of the sages was an interesting plot point, It allowed for more character development for Aita and led to the creation of one of the best AC villains, Bartholomew Rogeers, who fooled edward and got some interesting dialougue, so no he wasnīt pointless, but like Egpyt underused. The sages could have been interesting if they put effort in it, but the problem is that they didnīt thatīs why Germian sucked, unlike Rogers.
To Black flag: No it was a Assassins game, it was the story of how an dirty Pirate became a proud member of the Assassins Brotherhood after learning that his way wasnīt the best and so, he wanted to join a cause not this time out of Selfishness like his Pirate Career that cost him nearly everything. Itīs a lot like Altairīs change of heart after realizing that he had been in the wrong for a long time and turned into the best Assassin the world had ever seen. Itīs to tell a story how an average Pirate, became a Assassin and a ok one, after all he gave us the idea that maybe the Creed isnīt the end, but the Beginning of Wisdom, so no, itīs diespite your flawed Claims that itīs no true Scotsman.

See, i adressed you comment, that's why i corrected you, you made a mistake here yet again.


No, it was the Origin story of Bayek and that's not what was sold to fans during marketing. Ashraf pulled this same stunt during Black Flag's campaign. He doesn't seem to actually like the Assassin lore and instead opts to make historical epics and then tack on the Assassin element at the end so he can say, "See! It is an AC game because the protagonist does eventually become an Assassin!" The way the formation of the Creed happened came out of nowhere and was forced. Ubisoft are obsessed with getting new players on board which is why they refuse to move the story forward. Origins was yet another way of retelling the story from scratch, just like Black Flag.

Actually it is the Origin story of the Assassins as we now it from the first game( The fingercut ritual,The feathers, Leap of faith e.t.c) not the first Assassins per se, that would be Adam and Eve. itīs like with Pizza, Pizza was initially flat breat with toppings on it, until a Italian man made the famous Pizza Margahrita, creating the "first Pizza".

Thatīs the same principle with Orgins, he wasnīt the first Assassin in the long line of Assasssins, just the one that formed the ideas we know from AC 1, but of course the end product wasnīt satisfying at all, like whatīs the point in cutting the finger of a person, if you can just built the same Hidden blade Bayek uses, right? It was as you descriped it, a Ultimate failrue to tell a good Origin story, becasue the Devs didnīt knew, how to make a Character interesting without being relevant to the plot. Normally, the Character a viewer has to be inwested too is the one, who is the most important and the most revelant to the whole thing, itīs there to make the Main Protagonist stand out from the crowd like Altair and Ezio, who are remembered as the Greatest Protagonists of Assassins Creed, because of thier vital part of the plot. No one is going to care about a main hero that didnīt do anything important to the plot like Arno and/or wasnīt important enough like the Frye twins. People only care about a Character that is important, the last Assassins before Bayek( not counting AC1-4) pretty much lacked any important feats or achievements to make them likable. Thatīs how Bayek ended up being a fan favorite, everyone asked for a sequel with him, but all of it was thrawed because his story had one key problem: It was set in a period, where Greece was no longer interesting and got Bayek was probably made Founder of the Assassins, but they executed it the wrong way by discrediting Eve and other Characters. However that alone isnīt enough to make a Character Good and you can mess ip still, if you arenīt clear enough like origins.

Also Ashraf didnīt write the story, it was Alain Mercieca, blame him.


I agree here. It's clear the devs wanted to make a game about Greece or Rome instead. Also, the time period they chose technically isn't 'Ancient' Egypt anyway.

The admitted it even, look at the interview https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/BobWhitaker/20171016/307596/Interview_with_Maxime_Durand_on_Assassins_Creed_Or igins_and_Discovery_Tour_Mode.php


You're confusing the developers with the marketing directors and they are not the same. I can guarantee that Ubisoft's marketing department would have pushed for the male character in the trailers in order to appease a certain demographic minority that hates women in anything significant... The devs are not the marketing team. Also, you conveniently leave out that the walkthrough they showed on stage in front of the entire world, as in the gameplay, itself,was all Kassandra...
From people who have played the game at E3, they all agree that Kassandra's animations and face model seem to have got more care than her brother's.

sigh..Man, IF a Trailer or adversiting of any kind makes a Character look less important or doesn't show enough of her/him,exspecially a Main Character, then itīs a juristical testament that they this Character wasnīt the one they are the most found off or rather the one they had in Mind. She didnīt even talked in the trailer or made any long appearences, and she is our potential main Heroine! That alone proves my point that they didnīt cared so much for her. We have seen more stuff from Alexios alone, in both leaks, Trailers, pictures and even Gameplay footage that DIDN`T EVEN ADVERTISED KASSANDRA ALONE, and most of them showed us Alexious in the beginning anyway and it the case you didnīt noticed, THEY ARE BOTH SELECTABLE CHARACTERS, OF COURSE WE WILL GET TO PLAY BOTH We have the option to choose between both Characters. What a single Youtuber thinks alone isnīt important( there is Polygon after all).


Once again, I undestand the things you said perfectly, I just corrected you on things you didnīt knew off and decided to make it look like as if i wasnīt who get it, when you didnīt get what i was trying to say, like the way that you accused me of talking of the Quality of a game, instead of the plot. If you want to respond to me, donīt make assumptions about me.

MageAquarius20
06-13-2018, 09:44 PM
As a game: it looks gorgeous with a good open-world and a really fantastic Greece
As an Assassin's Creed: Well....it is not an Assassin's Creed but Ubisoft wanted it to be in the franchise and have the title. I don't know why and who came up with this idea I just wanna tell him you just ruined one of the greatest franchises in history.

AC had been ruined long ago, by ungrateful fans and people, who didn't cared for the plot. It's the best if we just make our own stories and wait for Ancestors.

GabrielCorvis
06-14-2018, 12:15 AM
AC had been ruined long ago, by ungrateful fans and people, who didn't cared for the plot. It's the best if we just make our own stories and wait for Ancestors.

Not necessarily directly responding just to this, but to the ones before this, too. Obviously I have my own opinions. The only AC games I didn't like were AC 3, Rogue, & Unity with its gods-awful micro-transactions & multi-player tailored bs. I, personally, enjoyed the hell out of Syndicate. I liked the Frye twins. Didn't really like the train missions. They felt tacked on & weren't that exciting, but I liked the rest of it. I have a personal beef with the combat in Origins. I feel if someone wants to play a Souls game, go ****ing play a Souls game & leave Assassin's Creed alone. When I can't ****ing stealth kill an ******* that's SEVEN levels or so below me, that's ****ing ridiculous. All-in-all I like it despite still not having finished it &, as one commenter I read already stated, it not actually being set in Ancient Egypt. I'd have much preferred Middle Kingdom, or even New Kingdom. Even though it's been done to death they could have done something interesting with Tutankhamun's death. Though it's been no more run into the ground than ****ing Cleopatra. I read an interesting theory just recently about Odyssey maybe being the origins of The Order. So that could be a thing. I'd also like to respond to something someone said earlier about the protagonists after Ezio & Altair. Of course no protagonist has done anything huge in the world since those two, they were Desmond Miles' ancestors who was a guy basically tasked with averting an apocalypse. You can't really top that for scope. Ultimately these games are about people. Not their actions. They're about individual peoples' stories set against this millennia-long shadow war & these oftentimes world-altering historical events. That's why I, personally, play them. I love the stories...most of them. I could do without the First Civilization nonsense, but that's just me. Also, what I actually came here to post was really wishing they (Ubisoft) would do a fully realized Shao Jun game. I would LOVE to play around in ancient China.

TaleraRis
06-14-2018, 06:51 AM
It doesn't give much of an Assassin's Creed feel to me. I don't like the dialogue options or the character choice. It makes the character we're going to play feel very generic. We always had a specific character we experienced the life of before. It gave us a special connection and made the character feel that much more real that you don't get from a more generic protagonist. I have hopes it will prove itself as a worthy entry in the series. But I'm not encouraged by what we have seen so far.

Wombles-_-
06-14-2018, 08:29 AM
THAT ^^
The more time passes & younger gamers get, the less they need to deal with present day anything from early AC. They aren't going to understand it without knowing the past games meanings, so are they going to be forced to buy/rent the early games to understand all of that?? I don't even remember any of it now, or care. Each new Assassin brings new things to each game to make them unique to that game - like the whole Pirate/ship thing was to Black Flag. It wasn't my thing, but it was a very good game.
Even in Origins which I adore, I had no clue what the messages meant from the people before? I'd let that play & go make some lunch lol
Just play the older games if you want that & Desmond. It was awesome & had its place, but I don't think it's going to go over well for newer AC fans coming in who have no idea what any of that meant 7 yrs ago.

Lastly, in the E3 gameplay seg, they're obviously going to be showing ACTION scenes for the show... people are running with a short clip they see as if it showcases the entire game & all you'll have in your arsenal.
??? The complaining blows my mind sometimes.
I

+1^^ Never mind new players too the game, I loved the modern day for the first three or four games. Sadly the slop of decline gets even stepper with each new game, Origins modern day has to be the most annoying in my opinion, I just wish if they want to waste their time on that crap now give me a skip button so I don't have to waste mine.

distrust74
06-14-2018, 08:58 AM
I never followed the community, so I am honestly surprised anyone cares about the modern day and backstory stuff. I remember back when the first game released the majority was entirely puzzled why they broke up the cool historical setting with this scifi element. Apparently a lot has changed since then. ;)

My thoughts? Thank you, fastest pre-order ever for me.
Setting looks great, gameplay seems improved from origins, I love the material details, and finally being allowed to choose gender was overdue. Really looking forward to it.

bitebug2003
06-14-2018, 11:20 AM
I don't mind that it's more of an RPG and it looks similar to other games I've played (right down to the romancing)

But is it an Assassin's Creed game in the true sense - maybe not.
It plays very similar to Assassin's Creed Origins but minus all the Assassin-y stuff which is a shame.
Although the Kotaku article I read said it has stealth - so I'm conflicted.

Perhaps Ubisoft can create a FAQ to clarify all the questions.

ETA:

I don't care about Modern Day either

And I really don't see the point of it in Origins - It's just a bunch of text files and jargon and I now make a point of glossing over it.

ProdiGurl
06-14-2018, 12:03 PM
It doesn't give much of an Assassin's Creed feel to me. I don't like the dialogue options or the character choice. It makes the character we're going to play feel very generic. We always had a specific character we experienced the life of before. It gave us a special connection and made the character feel that much more real that you don't get from a more generic protagonist. I have hopes it will prove itself as a worthy entry in the series. But I'm not encouraged by what we have seen so far.
Then Ubi hears how they aren't giving us female protagonists, guys complain that they don't want to play as a female -
EVERY character is "generic" - we all played as Ezio and Bayek, etc.

Kiroku
06-14-2018, 12:18 PM
Tombs are in the game aswell. Even if I wish they would have some deeper mechanics like in AC2 and ACB where we had to solve some puzzles and mechanisms to get ahead instead of just crushing walls and killing snakes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fN-9EbAQ7R8

KrK87
06-14-2018, 12:55 PM
Well mabey we will find out where Bayeks wife got the assassins blade.

jgrunes
06-14-2018, 01:21 PM
I guess a lot of you guys just watched the E3 show of the new AC: Odyssey. What do you guys like and dislike so far?

The facial animations look far better than in origins and the combat looks fancy. Sadly they didnt show much about stealth gameplay until now.


Btw already a gameplay video by jorraptor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vQhjAgZI04

Seems like the Leonidas Spear is somewhat a piece of eden when looking at the background in the inventory and also the glowing animation while using it. This also explains why its so powerful when doing special attacks with it.

Thanks for starting this! The only thing I would love to see changed is the ability to use a shield. This is Ancient Greece, it's integral for warfare in this time. Sign this petition if you would love to see them add player shields perhaps in a dlc!
https://www.change.org/p/ubisoft-bring-back-the-shield-for-assassins-creed-odyssey-2a473dd2-8a36-4944-b5ad-92c946c0611f?recruiter=881788103&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial

DA SHIZZLE IG
06-14-2018, 01:28 PM
YO WHAT IS THIS? LOL!!!

AC ORIGINS 2.0
AC ORIGINS: SPARTA DRAGON
AC ORIGINS: 300 OUT OF HELL
ASSASSINS 300
AC ORIGINS 3RD EXPANSION CANCELED AND MADE INTO A FULL GAME
AC ORIGINS PRE - PREQUEL

OK, enough of that. I and a lot of other long time real fans of the series have all been fearing this dreaded day. It has finally come brothers, the death of assassins creed.10(or 11) years down the drain! One of the greatest and unique stories/series in the history of gaming has been officially tossed out the window because of greed. The templars(casuals) have officially won! Lets break down the downfall of our favorite series shall we.

1. First it was the modern day(THE MAIN PLOT OF THE SERIES)
They slowly pushed it aside in order to milk the series. This was triggered by all the casuals blindly tossing money at ubisoft and the casuals who just jumped on the AC hype train.

2. They started to slowly drift away from what made AC........AC
The animus portion of the game is almost as important as the modern day/real world portion. They have built up amazing lore around the assassins. Especially the way they handle business. The INFAMOUS hood started to be used less and less. They started forgetting about important things like EAGLE VISION. Correct me if I'm wrong(it's been awhile), but isn't Desmond's bloodline special? Like I thought only they had eagle vision lol. Now all the randoms have it as well smh. They moved away from the "brotherhood" little by little and started to focus on individual assassins stories that really had no effect on the actual plot.

Like I, and other "core fans" have said many times. This is starting to not even look/feel like assassins creed anymore. But their was always enough of it there to keep us coming back. But not this time, this game has finally crossed that thinning line. This game(ODYSSEY) is exactly what I said AC was gonna turn into, AC WITHOUT A SOUL. It's just about a random character in a popular/important random time in history with a story, killing people. It's the casuals wet dream finally come true, **** the plot!!! Never mind the fact that this "new" game is literally just a reskin of origins with a few things moved around and tweeked. THEY DONE GOT RID OF THE ALL MIGHTY HIDDEN BLADE!!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!! No hood, no brotherhood, no actual assassins, the lore is out the window, and the plot/modern day has come to a complete stop. WOW!!!! This game honestly could have been done in an expansion. Actually this would have been perfect for an expansion for origins. Don't feel like explaining this but if you already know this games set up. Then you can easily see where I'm going with this. I begged ubisoft to make a real and final assassins creed game for us core fans that would push the plot and end it all. Then go ahead and make 50 million yearly random soulless games with the name assassins creed attached to it. Rush them out and fill them with loot boxes and put tons of overpriced cool cut content behind a pay wall for all we care. That would make everybody happy.

I'm gonna need all of you AC4 haters("IT'S A PIRATE GAME, NOT AN ASSASSINS GAME") to keep that same energy with this one. "IT'S A PIRATE GAME, NOT AN ASSASSINS GAME" would actually 100% apply to this game. Ubisoft still hasn't learned smh. Please skip this game or wait 6 months after it bombs and get it for 1/2 the price(if you must get it).

(I'M NOT TALKING TO THE AC4 TEAM, YOU GUYS ARE THE REAL M.V.P's. Y'ALL SEEM TO BE THE ONLY ONES WHO STILL CARE)


*** Edited for Content: Please don't bypass the auto censor - thank you
bitebug2003

DA SHIZZLE IG
06-14-2018, 01:51 PM
Yo DAWG, I HEARD YOU LIKE PREQUELS. SO I TOOK YOUR PREQUEL AND GAVE IT A PREQUEL, A PRE-PREQUEL!!!
https://bangshift.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Yo-Dawg-Heard-You.jpg

ninja4hire10
06-14-2018, 02:32 PM
As a game, it looks stunning. I'm more amped for this one than I was for Origins, which was great in its own right.

But I get it: Odyssey looks to be, at least from what we know, about as far from the AC of old as you can get (never played Witcher 3 but I trust other's comparisons.)

What I'm thinking Ubi is doing is similar to what both Marvel and DC do in the comics biz: start a title, develop the lore and characters, then scrap the thing in favor a new direction, only to then return to that original direction down the road a ways. In relation to AC, maybe Ubi is going this RPG route with less focus on the original mechanics and flavor only to return full force, maybe not in the next game (if 2019 completes the supposed trilogy) but certainly the one after that which, if fan service is anything, will probably be Japan. To me, that makes sense. And it looks like they've already started, as OD apparently has more MD and First Civ in it than the more recent games in the series...

WendysBrioche
06-14-2018, 05:00 PM
It's nice. Gameplay looks great, combat is the same system from Origins but the enemies stagger a little more when hit so it is improved. I thought they should have done more of that for Origins, it's the one aspect of Origins holding it back is the departure of those paired/reaction animations in combat.

The combat system itself isn't bad for either game, but I guess they just didn't think about it or knew people liked the reactive animations so much in previous titles.

Environment is beautiful as always, graphics are top notch and amazing. That battle on the beach in the demo, HOLY CRAP!!!! So many npc's it's actually the perfect size battle I've been looking for from action adventure games and rpg's. I can only hope Elder Scrolls VI has similarly sized battles too!!!!

I will say though I prefer both the style and the artwork of Assassin's Creed Origins. A lot of this is mainly due to my bias for Ancient Egypt as a setting, I just love it. I loved Bayek, and in my opinion I truly liked the artwork of AC Origins for what it was, beyond the fact that it was Ancient Egypt and my preference for that.

Not meaning to be critical of the artwork in Odyssey, it's still fantastic! But the art and environments of AC Origins are special to me that's all. It was a fantastically crafted game in terms of the art, open world, mission design, game design, and the layout of the environments form both an artistic perspective and a gameplay perspective. I'm sure Odyssey will have it's fans as well!

cawatrooper9
06-14-2018, 05:23 PM
But is it an Assassin's Creed game in the true sense - maybe not.
It plays very similar to Assassin's Creed Origins but minus all the Assassin-y stuff which is a shame.
Although the Kotaku article I read said it has stealth - so I'm conflicted.

Perhaps Ubisoft can create a FAQ to clarify all the questions.




The footage shown at the press conference didn't really showcase stealth much.

There are lots of other gameplay videos all over YouTube right now, though. Some of them are played by some more stealth-minded players, so you might be interested in checking them out.

MageAquarius20
06-14-2018, 07:18 PM
Not necessarily directly responding just to this, but to the ones before this, too. Obviously I have my own opinions. The only AC games I didn't like were AC 3, Rogue, & Unity with its gods-awful micro-transactions & multi-player tailored bs. I, personally, enjoyed the hell out of Syndicate. I liked the Frye twins. Didn't really like the train missions. They felt tacked on & weren't that exciting, but I liked the rest of it. I have a personal beef with the combat in Origins. I feel if someone wants to play a Souls game, go ****ing play a Souls game & leave Assassin's Creed alone. When I can't ****ing stealth kill an ******* that's SEVEN levels or so below me, that's ****ing ridiculous. All-in-all I like it despite still not having finished it &, as one commenter I read already stated, it not actually being set in Ancient Egypt. I'd have much preferred Middle Kingdom, or even New Kingdom. Even though it's been done to death they could have done something interesting with Tutankhamun's death. Though it's been no more run into the ground than ****ing Cleopatra. I read an interesting theory just recently about Odyssey maybe being the origins of The Order. So that could be a thing. I'd also like to respond to something someone said earlier about the protagonists after Ezio & Altair. Of course no protagonist has done anything huge in the world since those two, they were Desmond Miles' ancestors who was a guy basically tasked with averting an apocalypse. You can't really top that for scope. Ultimately these games are about people. Not their actions. They're about individual peoples' stories set against this millennia-long shadow war & these oftentimes world-altering historical events. That's why I, personally, play them. I love the stories...most of them. I could do without the First Civilization nonsense, but that's just me. Also, what I actually came here to post was really wishing they (Ubisoft) would do a fully realized Shao Jun game. I would LOVE to play around in ancient China.

I agree with you more than AnimusLover, AC 5(better title than Origins) should have been set during the reign of Ramesses II and dwell deep into the Egyptian world as well as advancing the FIrst CIv plot, which without it, AC would be a bit boring and loses itīs charm, AC without anything related to the first CIv is no true AC. AC is the struggle between Freedom vs Oppression and not just some personal Journeys in life, itīs a Philosophical and Ideological war first, a adventure secound.

The Problem with many AC fans is that they donīt understand the franshise including the Devs of these games, not counting Patrice.

If they would truly have loved AC, then they would have never made Rougue, Unity, Origins, Uprising e.t.c

Hopefully Ancestors is going to destroy this franshise for good.

Galactus123
06-14-2018, 07:37 PM
It looks great but why it has to be Assassin's Creed? I would be a lot more interested if it was a new IP. It would have been a great opportunity to create a new franchise.

HDinHB
06-14-2018, 10:30 PM
Tombs are in the game aswell. Even if I wish they would have some deeper mechanics like in AC2 and ACB where we had to solve some puzzles and mechanisms to get ahead instead of just crushing walls and killing snakes.


I've missed Ezio's tombs since..well, since Ezio. Origins was an amazing opportunity to bring it back, but they missed it.

cawatrooper9
06-14-2018, 10:52 PM
I've missed Ezio's tombs since..well, since Ezio. Origins was an amazing opportunity to bring it back, but they missed it.

Yeah, Origins tombs were a different thing.

I still enjoyed them, but they obviously were quite different than the Ezio era parkour puzzles.

DA SHIZZLE IG
06-15-2018, 02:15 AM
I don't care about Modern Day either

And I really don't see the point of it in Origins - It's just a bunch of text files and jargon and I now make a point of glossing over it.
SMH, and this is the very reason why they started milking the games and the reason why we got ACU, ACS, and now 300's creed. Like I said before, they should make separate games for the casual players. Like just make it in the universe of AC(like ACU and 75% of ACS) instead of dragging down the series great legacy further and further. At least give us an option instead of ticking off the day 1 core fan base.

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 02:34 AM
SMH, and this is the very reason why they started milking the games and the reason why we got ACU, ACS, and now 300's creed. Like I said before, they should make separate games for the casual players. Like just make it in the universe of AC(like ACU and 75% of ACS) instead of dragging down the series great legacy further and further. At least give us an option instead of ticking off the day 1 core fan base.
So you listened to all that audio dialog that Bayek uncovered and understood everything?? It was like listening to someone on crack. What was there to understand & how does it matter now?

I look at the Modern Day content as ancient Egyptian religion - once the ancient people died and generations passed, the gods & dogma they believed in essentially went with them.
In my view, this aspect of the AC games is no longer necessary over time - it's been over 7 years & newer players aren't going to follow this spiritual trail to know what's going on now. They either need to go all in and commit to this aspect and make it something huge [bring it to a conclusion then end it], or end it now. Playing with it a little isn't doing anyone a service.
When it's in Origins & most of us don't even grasp what they're talking about, what's the point anymore?
Maybe YOU understood it, but I didn't & people coming into it won't & how is it relevant to them as they play the game?
I think it's a detraction to the game at this point for even longer term AC fans unless they really do serious work with it to make it mean something. & I question if it's even a good idea in today's gaming world when you compare it to what's out there.

ZBurris
06-15-2018, 02:36 AM
400 years or so before the Creed was even started? I dont know how they are going to connect the story to AC. There must be a lot about the first civ and apples of eden.

RVSage
06-15-2018, 02:49 AM
I played the demo at E3

here are my thoughts

Combat

1. It is an improved version of the system introduced in Origins,I like the ability system, now the combat feels more like God of War (the animations do not have the weight like GoW though)
2. The combat animations are vastly improved over Origins, or at least I feel so, the dodge roll feels more natural, but the kick can appear unrealistic sometimes though..
3. Naval combat is similar to one we saw in Origins, the destructibility with ram, is better than even black flag, it is definitely improved over black flag, in terms of handling,
4. Large scale battles, felt like origins Horde mode, with a boss. Bosses have their own abilities/rage meter

Stealth

1. The spear works more or less like the hidden blade, it has it's own abilities, I still feel it is off, but maybe it takes getting used to I guess.
2. In my play through, I did not see any opportunity in terms of social stealth, felt similar to origins, if there are improvements I did not get to experience them.

Facial Animations /Lip Sync

1. In some places it felt off, but I heard the lip sync AI generated, which means it can only get better (hopefully)

Graphics
1. More or less similar to origins, with the Colors toned up. the sea looks better than in origins, the Sea is the biggest upgrade in terms of graphics I guess.

2. The towns, areas look and feel like improved versions of Origins Greek cities.

Customization

1. I like the customization UI in Odyssey better than Origins.

Ending the post with a cool Spartan Statue placed at the Demo area

https://imgur.com/0PVLuV3.jpg

DA SHIZZLE IG
06-15-2018, 07:23 AM
So you listened to all that audio dialog that Bayek uncovered and understood everything?? It was like listening to someone on crack. What was there to understand & how does it matter now?

I look at the Modern Day content as ancient Egyptian religion - once the ancient people died and generations passed, the gods & dogma they believed in essentially went with them.
In my view, this aspect of the AC games is no longer necessary over time - it's been over 7 years & newer players aren't going to follow this spiritual trail to know what's going on now. They either need to go all in and commit to this aspect and make it something huge [bring it to a conclusion then end it], or end it now. Playing with it a little isn't doing anyone a service.
When it's in Origins & most of us don't even grasp what they're talking about, what's the point anymore?
Maybe YOU understood it, but I didn't & people coming into it won't & how is it relevant to them as they play the game?
I think it's a detraction to the game at this point for even longer term AC fans unless they really do serious work with it to make it mean something. & I question if it's even a good idea in today's gaming world when you compare it to what's out there.

LOL you sound just like the suits that are ruining gaming. That's exactly how they think. Of course I understood it, it was a bunch of call backs to things that happened earlier in the series. We also got some new info about the isu and how they can predict things. Wasn't much but we got something. Only core fans who been following the actual story would understand. If you didn't understand, or even care to understand. Then this means you are not a core fan. You are a casual fan of the series and there's nothing wrong with that. But when companies get greedy and a bunch of casuals start flocking in. You guys start having an effect on the games, and it's usually negative. Thus the reason why they are barely focusing on the story(modern day) anymore. When a bunch of casuals who throw infinite amounts of money at them start making request like "GET RID OF MODERN DAY, WHO CARES ABOUT THIS DESMOND GUY AND HIS FAMILY, SCREW THE CREED, SCREW THE LORE, WHAT'S A SHAWN, AND THE ISU OR WHATEVER. I WANT TO BE A NINJA ASSASSIN IN A RANDOM POPULAR PERIOD IN TIME HAVING AN ADVENTURE THAT LEADS TO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING EVERY GAME". They listen to y'all over the core day 1 fan base. To make this more clear. Look what C.O.D has turned into, the game is just basically a multiplayer game now, with a added on rushed single player. This kinda happend to halo too, just not as bad. GTA5 canceled it's highly anticipated Single player DLC to focus on multiplayer. People are actually paying full price just to play the multiplayer portion of the game. Not even interested in the Amazing classic game SMH.

This is the very reason why I asked ubisoft to make offshoots of AC for gamers like you. That way everybody's happy. This will avoid the issue we have now and ubisoft wont destroy the series legacy. Let me ask you a question. Do you think it's fair for the long time core fans to be pushed aside. To make some noobs who only care about part of the games happy? I mean really look at what you posted.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 08:17 AM
Remember folks, this guy is a "core fan" but thinks that only Desmond's bloodline has the ability to use Eagle Vision and the like.

Infinite_Gnosis
06-15-2018, 10:25 AM
This shizzle guy makes some good points tho... is the truth too hard to swallow perhaps? It seems like a lot of humans don't like to hear inconfienient (negative in their eyes) truths nowadays.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 10:54 AM
I think it's amazing that no AC or AC-related stream approached how the dialogue options actually fit the AC universe and the Animus features. I mean, we're reliving memories but they suddenly decide to include dialogue options and variability to what was supposed to be written in stone, so to speak.

They stream, participate in interviews and special shows, like the E3 Coliseum series, but no one asks them about it, and, of course, they don't even touch the issue beyond the line "we thought it'd be cool to add dialogue options".

Unfathomable.

Infinite_Gnosis
06-15-2018, 10:56 AM
Because logic doesn't matter in this day and age anymore. YOLO! They should put in some monsters next ti.... oh they already did. Perhaps some zombies then? The Isu got really mad this time, so now they turned everyone into a zombie with a stuffed unicorn piece of eden.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/LCdPNT81vlv3y/giphy.gif

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 11:14 AM
Because logic doesn't matter in this day and age anymore. YOLO! They should put in some monsters next ti.... oh they already did. Perhaps some zombies then? The Isu got really mad this time, so now they turned everyone into a zombie with a stuffed unicorn piece of eden.
I have no problem with cultural mythology, whatsoever. Ancient Egypt's culture is fundamentally rooted in that framework, so it was only logical to approach those aspects. Ancient Greece's cultural values also have a prominent connection with mythological aspects.

That's not the problem, here. It's one thing, to delve into the cultural values of a country or a society, it's another to bypass the limitations imposed by the features of the systems you built your game around. AC is founded on the concept of genetic memory. I'm not going to comment on whether or not it's realistically reasonable or plausible. But, if you're exploring the concept of genetic memories, you can't simply rebuilt the rules, half-way into the series, in order to simply add the elements that you want. Reliving genetic memories and the element of variability, do not fit together and turns the entire experience literally implausible and nonsensical.

BlobfisherJr
06-15-2018, 11:38 AM
So I've been really interested to how Quebec would've built the storyline in this game. We do know that we play as a mercenary instead of an Assassin (pre-ending) and that we won't have a creed, so why call it Assassin's Creed? Obviously the story will be different and not contain the usual story aspects, but I still believe Assassin's Creed is a fitting name aside from the present time, the first civilization and the pieces of Eden.

I think we will understand this at the most during the ending, where having multiple endings based on our choices will decide if we fit in a Greece of order, or freedom. As stated by the creative director, Jonathan Dumont during the E3 conference: "In this land shaped by the gods, raises a conflict between order, and "chaos"," where chaos is the definition of freedom. This is 431 BC, freedom as a way of rulership is not only just on the rise by the Spartan's enemy, but literally is the opposite compared to the way Spartans during this time rule their society. Ofcourse they would define the ideology of the enemy and the opposite of their own rulership chaos.

I read a youtube comment saying that Sparta literally stands for strict ruling and order. The Templar ideology.

On the other hand, the Athenians as already stated shaped western democracy and freedom. Will our different endings portrait which side our character seeks? Do you as the player, want to play as a "Templar" or an "Assassin", two different factions not yet invented as an order or a creed (Templars vs Assassins), but as ideologies. The conflict between order, and freedom, Spartans and Athenians. Just a speculation.

Choosing the Athenian side will result in an ending maybe meeting Darius, the first recorded Assassin that used the hidden blade and still is alive during the time of this game (Darius I (550 BCE – October 486 BCE)). Will one of the ending scenes see Alexios or Kassandra put on the hidden blade used by Darius?

OR

Maybe choosing the Spartan side will result in an ending seeing your character march with the Spartans, fullfilling your father's wish and build the groundworks of the Templar ideology.


Again, the RPG aspect that Quebec "are pushing the franchise into". Overall, it fits in the Assassin's Creed lore, it has always been a conflict between the two ideologies and we will definetaly experience that. So is it Assassin's Creed? :confused:

Galactus123
06-15-2018, 11:50 AM
I was a big fan of the series but I haven't been very interested after Assassin's Creed III. That game was great. I liked Desmond and the modern day stuff. It was always interesting to see how the story continues. I hope they remaster ACIII for PS4 and Xbox One.

ModernWaffle
06-15-2018, 12:04 PM
I think it's amazing that no AC or AC-related stream approached how the dialogue options actually fit the AC universe and the Animus features. I mean, we're reliving memories but they suddenly decide to include dialogue options and variability to what was supposed to be written in stone, so to speak.

They stream, participate in interviews and special shows, like the E3 Coliseum series, but no one asks them about it, and, of course, they don't even touch the issue beyond the line "we thought it'd be cool to add dialogue options".

Unfathomable.

The thing is even if they could explain how it fits into the universe and Animus features, I'm actually against the idea of dialogue options from a perspective of narrative writing. The idea of dialogue options suggest no certain canon for a story and because of this, writing the narrative for a sequel becomes more difficult since you have to interpret which decisions were part of the 'true timeline'.

The option to include dialogue options then suggests to me they're planning of dropping their attention on story quality because you can't write a good story without ongoing consistency. I think this is fine for other RPG games because some people might feel more immersed playing as a character they can identify with as themselves but it is jarring to introduce this feature when the series started as one that focused on compulsory protagonists / refined storytelling.

If you start giving room for allowed changes to the fundamental concepts of a series (without adequate reasons), then there is technically nothing stopping it from turning into the opposite of what it originally set out to achieve and then back again - and so on - over a stretch of time. To me, this doesn't benefit anyone and I honestly hope that for the rest of the franchise they're going to stick with Odyssey's direction to prevent expectations from fluctuating constantly.

So my worries about Odyssey are not so much about I dislike feature 'X' or feature 'Z', but the overall feeling that it's approached from a 'we thought it'd be cool to add ____ because why not' view, a sentiment which hadn't been as pronounced in previous titles.

Looking forward though, please just let Odyssey perform well and be a joy to play for those who like it - but stick to it. Don't take away the newly found popular features in the sequel and then add new arbitrary additions that will put off the fans you have just gained.

ArchangelJ97
06-15-2018, 12:11 PM
Though I am not a hardcore fan of AC, I play AC only because I like to travel around those historical settings, and that the protagonist is usually a very cool character. However, from what I remembered, the Creed of the Assassins is about having free will, instead of being constrained within sets of rules and order. Although I do get that some people like the older franchises because it sticks to the lore or whatnot, but isn't that making the franchise too... stuck in a stereotype?

I don't know too much about AC's lore, since I haven't played through all of them, but the oldest few ACs, despite some changes in every installment, felt somewhat the same across all of them. Many fans were asking the game for some must haves: hoods, hidden blade, instant-killing assassination, parkour, historical settings, linear gameplay, etc. It's as if without these elements, it's not an AC game. I do get that hoods and instant assassinating with hidden blades are cool, that's how I got into the first AC games, being attracted by the pictures of Ezio on a random magezine. However, if the only way for an AC game to be an AC game is to meet all the above elements, isn't that too "Templar"-like? Constrained and defined in set rules, where no changes are allowed to occur. By tweaking some elements in the franchise and allowing the franchise to grow, isn't that the exact portray and direct expression of "free will", one of the core elements within the Creed? Hidden baldes, although iconic, is not a must-have for someone to follow the Creed. Shouldn't it be that as long as one is following the Assassin's Creed, they can be considered as one within the Brotherhood? Or must they have a hidden blade and a hood and fantastic parkour skills to be an Assassin? Isn't that too... ritualistic, even religious-like? And religions, to my knowledge, is not known for freedom of thought or absolute free will, but the exact opposite.

Aside from that, being RPG isn't that much of a bad choice, and being the furthest back in history, with so many things unrecorded, we cannot search the documents and check if the choices we made actually led to those historical scenes or not. Deaths of celebrities or rulers are not something as clear as it may be in recent histories, not to mention that there are mysterious deaths within modern history that is still unsolved, much less likely we'll be able to solve ones that are 2500 years ago. Also, since it's around the period where Darius is still alive, who knows if we will be able to meet this first assassin? Maybe the spear-head was what that became the blade for the first hidden knife? Of all the things that we know about Odyssey as of now, they are only scraps of information ere and there, as well as the demo and some gameplay at E3. Although the main game's mechanics should all be finished or near finish by this time, what we got to see is just still a small fraction of what is possible within this game. There are much more that we don't know yet. Why can't we settle ourselves down, and wait to see what is going to happen to this game, to the lore, and as well as to the franchise before flaming out what we think the game is, as if it can't undergo changes and perfection.

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 12:13 PM
This shizzle guy makes some good points tho... is the truth too hard to swallow perhaps? It seems like a lot of humans don't like to hear inconfienient (negative in their eyes) truths nowadays.
It's not about hearing 'truth' and not liking it - - it's a matter of Player preferences across the board within the fan base. We all like & dislike different things in this game. I've been in this forum long enough to have seen a few releases and people fighting over what they love and hate - why one is a favorite for one player & another is trashing it. He may list some 'facts' about Modern day/Ubi crew decisions - but that doesn't mean he's right on the subjective side of it in having preferences towards it in every AC game when many others don't.
Like I said, imo, they need to go all in & really do it (like ACII style), or dedicate more quality time to game production & skip it all. Or, just make the modern day optional to "day one" base who still want it.
In my mind, ACOdy being 400 yrs prior, should be/have been the one to go all out like they did in ACII and make a big presence with it. I have no interest in a little bone being thrown into a game that I don't even understand the meanings of. We don't know what they did for ACOdy.
It doesn't make me/us any less of an AC fan. It's still the one series I'll preorder & buy on release date.

Fudz4
06-15-2018, 12:18 PM
3 Concerns of Mine from Watching Footage:

* Dialog segments are choppy especially with decreased frame-rate and out of sync lip movements and expressions. Make it smoother. - Also some voice acting is TOO cheerful and its seems wrong.

* Combat looks sloppy in some places, there are some enemies that dont respond to hits they take, and when you kill enemies the ragdoll physics is a little over the top.

* It might just be me, but the movement, much like the combat looks a little too 'MMOish' if that makes sense, it feels like Kassandra/Alexios is running faster than their actual strides, as if their movement animation is completely separate and inconsequential from some artificial speed designation. make movement seem more realistic and consequential to the character animations.

Apart from those 3 things I notices so far, I am SUPER excited :)

Infinite_Gnosis
06-15-2018, 12:20 PM
I think we will understand this at the most during the ending, where having multiple endings based on our choices will decide if we fit in a Greece of order, or freedom. As stated by the creative director, Jonathan Dumont during the E3 conference: "In this land shaped by the gods, raises a conflict between order, and "chaos"," where chaos is the definition of freedom. This is 431 BC, freedom as a way of rulership is not only just on the rise by the Spartan's enemy, but literally is the opposite compared to the way Spartans during this time rule their society. Ofcourse they would define the ideology of the enemy and the opposite of their own rulership chaos.



Something interesting to think about is that a truely free society would also be orderly in nature. We like to think of western society as the definition and pinnacle of what a free society should look like (mostly because of our cultural programming), but we are all basically money slaves, where we needs money for almost everything in life, and where an unhealthy amount of people are really struggling to get by, except for the elite ruling classes, like members of the monarchy for example, who are automatically born into almost infinite wealth. This logically creates a lot of chaos, conflict, and confusion.

Think about it.. if you have a group of cows walking around, that have access to plenty of grass, they will walk around peacefully and orderly, but if there is only a little bit of grass, they will start fighting over it, and start biting eachother in order to survive.

ArchangelJ97
06-15-2018, 12:23 PM
As I said previously, I play AC because of the historical settings, and because the protagonists are cool.

This time, we got a once Spartan protagonist who could be either a ranged shooter, a "Kratos"-like warrior, or an assassin, especially in ancient Greece where mythologies and philosophy flourished. Why not? That sounds pretty cool. Moreover, I can choose my dialogue and see how it can change the world around my character, that's such a plus. Then there's character customization, from choosing gender, to modifying my gears and engraving, that's also super cool!

Also, there's the exploration in ancient Greece, virtually a time-traveling vessel, how cool is that? On top of all these, we get to Sparta Kick anyone at our heart's content, that is by itself a huge must-try in my life :D

Although I am not a big fan of naval battles, but we get to ram and slive open enemy ships, why not give that a try?

With all the above reasons, I can say no more but to hop on the hype-ship and sail straight to ancient Greece!

*Do want a roadmap for the post-release content though, so that I can decide which edition of the game should I preorder, and should I get a season pass or not.

Edit: Btw, how can I quote someone? I pressed the little + sign next to the "Reply" button, but it does nothing. Also, clicking the "Rely" button doesn't seem to work either. Is it my browser's fault, or did I do something wrong in this process?

Infinite_Gnosis
06-15-2018, 12:52 PM
It's not about hearing 'truth' and not liking it - - it's a matter of Player preferences across the board within the fan base. We all like & dislike different things in this game. I've been in this forum long enough to have seen a few releases and people fighting over what they love and hate - why one is a favorite for one player & another is trashing it. He may list some 'facts' about Modern day/Ubi crew decisions - but that doesn't mean he's right on the subjective side of it in having preferences towards it in every AC game when many others don't.
Like I said, imo, they need to go all in & really do it (like ACII style), or dedicate more quality time to game production & skip it all. Or, just make the modern day optional to "day one" base who still want it.
In my mind, ACOdy being 400 yrs prior, should be/have been the one to go all out like they did in ACII and make a big presence with it. I have no interest in a little bone being thrown into a game that I don't even understand the meanings of. We don't know what they did for ACOdy.
It doesn't make me/us any less of an AC fan. It's still the one series I'll preorder & buy on release date.

True.

Just to make things clear, i don't agree with him saying that you are not a core fan, i agree that the ISU content in ACO was way more vague than in AC:2 or Brotherhood for example, because they turned it into optional content, without having any connections to the main storyline of ACO, and without any cutscenes of Bayek responding to what he saw whatsoever. It made it seem unimportant, especially because they were actually able to make dedicated cutscenes for trivial stuff, which made the Isu segments seem even more irrelevant, and yeah, i do think this has a lot to do with the huge group of people who don't have a soul connection to the franchise, and really have a negative impact on the cohesiveness of the overarching storyline.

This is what happens when you constantly need to think about how to expand your "fanbase" in order to maximize profits.

It's kinda funny how they can make the game bigger and put more people on it, because they keep making more profits, but that doesn't necessarily make the game better, just like how buying a huge house doesn't necessarily make your life better. Putting your heart and soul into something is the most important thing. Not turn it into a huge factory. I just love the laws of this universe.

Helforsite
06-15-2018, 01:14 PM
We already had some leeway on experiencing our ancestor's memories in the Animus with regards to how we went about doing missions (stealth or combat) and doing side activities when we wanted. This was, because we only had to built up a certain amount of Synchronization by doing exactly what their Ancestors did until we were synchronized enough to unlock further memories. Layla's version of the Animus already allows her to relive memories of non-ancestors making it absolutely plausible that her Animus is more efficent /better at Synchronization thereby allowing us to unlock memories faster and without following the DNA donor's life as closely and exact as before.

Kiroku
06-15-2018, 01:19 PM
Yeah, Origins tombs were a different thing.

I still enjoyed them, but they obviously were quite different than the Ezio era parkour puzzles.

At first I enjoyed them too but after visiting one of them u quickly noticed you visit the same tomb again and again with different paths. Some variety and puzzles in tombs not being affected by the main story would be cool. Every tomb would be a special one and different from others like in ac2. Maybe they will work on that in the next games after successfully transition to the rpg style

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 01:34 PM
LOL you sound just like the suits that are ruining gaming. That's exactly how they think. Of course I understood it, it was a bunch of call backs to things that happened earlier in the series. We also got some new info about the isu and how they can predict things. Wasn't much but we got something. Only core fans who been following the actual story would understand. If you didn't understand, or even care to understand. Then this means you are not a core fan. You are a casual fan of the series and there's nothing wrong with that. But when companies get greedy and a bunch of casuals start flocking in. You guys start having an effect on the games, and it's usually negative. Thus the reason why they are barely focusing on the story(modern day) anymore. When a bunch of casuals who throw infinite amounts of money at them start making request like "GET RID OF MODERN DAY, WHO CARES ABOUT THIS DESMOND GUY AND HIS FAMILY, SCREW THE CREED, SCREW THE LORE, WHAT'S A SHAWN, AND THE ISU OR WHATEVER. I WANT TO BE A NINJA ASSASSIN IN A RANDOM POPULAR PERIOD IN TIME HAVING AN ADVENTURE THAT LEADS TO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING EVERY GAME". They listen to y'all over the core day 1 fan base. To make this more clear. Look what C.O.D has turned into, the game is just basically a multiplayer game now, with a added on rushed single player. This kinda happend to halo too, just not as bad. GTA5 canceled it's highly anticipated Single player DLC to focus on multiplayer. People are actually paying full price just to play the multiplayer portion of the game. Not even interested in the Amazing classic game SMH.

This is the very reason why I asked ubisoft to make offshoots of AC for gamers like you. That way everybody's happy. This will avoid the issue we have now and ubisoft wont destroy the series legacy. Let me ask you a question. Do you think it's fair for the long time core fans to be pushed aside. To make some noobs who only care about part of the games happy? I mean really look at what you posted.
First: @ RVSage (https://forums.ubi.com/member.php/1366606-RVSage?communityUsers=1&f=27) I am SOOO jealous you got to play a demo & be at E3 (I live about an 1.5 hrs away). So Xcited to see the details of your gameplay.

@ joelsantos24 (https://forums.ubi.com/member.php/363581-joelsantos24?communityUsers=1&f=27) >> I mean, we're reliving memories but they suddenly decide to include dialogue options and variability to what was supposed to be written in stone, so to speak. <<
That's easy, the unique RPG choices you make for your character is the choice that was originally made in your personal experience in the game. You essentially create your character's history. Otherwise, imo, they'd need to go back to the RIGID format of forcing Mission completion the way Ubi demands it - desynching missions that so many complained about becuz you failed to do EXACTLY what was historically done by the character. W/out desynching, we're all technically doing missions differently, right?
I don't get this obsession for Rigid format? Limiting the AC fans (new & old) imo, isn't a positive, inviting aspect of gaming.

They're trying to give us more freedom/options so less whine & complain (which clearly will continue no matter what they do or offer). :rolleyes:

@ Da Shiz - I don't know if I'm casual to AC? I've been in this forum since 2011 & consider myself a "base" fan even tho I started w/ Brotherhood when I first came back to gaming again. I immediately bought ACII & LOVED it, including the Modern Day nostalgia w/ puzzles. The mystery of it was AMAZING! I have fond memories I'll never forget!
It may be/have been a core element to the game but I don't think it's a core element that has to continue every single game anymore.
& I don't believe 'greed' is a motive by Ubi "suits"... as a business, there's practical issues to consider in how much time/resource it takes to add the content when fewer & fewer care about it or understand the backstory of it from AC1 - or if it's a component they want to drop? Doesn't prove "greed".
TV shows, movies & games w/ longer lifespans, evolve over time - that's the way it works for better or worse.

> You guys start having an effect on the games, and it's usually negative<
Ok, that's your personal perspective - not shared by others incl longer AC fans like myself.
I remember begging to keep Assassin Dens & adding customization options w/ $$ we make from looting/missions. I LOVED liberating Cities & Brotherhood's Ceremony! I wanted that to stay forever. I wanted assassin recruiting that you can call them in on missions.... Plus I wanted all timed races to end. We all like different components of previous games.

Ex. Resident Evil series - I came back to gaming & started w/ RE4 , so I base RE on what 4 was... RE has a similar issue w/ fans that started from game 1. They dislike 4 and on. [I disliked RE at #6 (went into FPS and less horror]... they can't please all RE fans w/ opposing preferences.

But I DO agree w/ you on the Ninja thing. But guess what, even if Ubi gave in to those Ninja requests, the game would be a one-off due to the time period and choice of Character model & the next game wouldn't be ninjas. Different titles/time periods appeal to different people. We just came off Egypt, my absolute FAV location ever. Now Greece, my 2nd FAV location. I'm in sheer bliss ;):cool: but others aren't, they're dying for Japan - *not* my fav, but I'll probly buy it & love the game in what it will uniquely offer. I roll with the Variety they put out & expand myself. If it's fun, xciting, beautiful, challenging, love the characters, I'm happy.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 01:39 PM
The thing is even if they could explain how it fits into the universe and Animus features, I'm actually against the idea of dialogue options from a perspective of narrative writing. The idea of dialogue options suggest no certain canon for a story and because of this, writing the narrative for a sequel becomes more difficult since you have to interpret which decisions were part of the 'true timeline'.
There isn't a logical way to explain how memories are now, supposedly, mutable. I also don't agree with the inclusion of dialogue options.


The option to include dialogue options then suggests to me they're planning of dropping their attention on story quality because you can't write a good story without ongoing consistency. I think this is fine for other RPG games because some people might feel more immersed playing as a character they can identify with as themselves but it is jarring to introduce this feature when the series started as one that focused on compulsory protagonists / refined storytelling.
The neglect of the narrative component, isn't new in the series. Back when Unity was released, one of Ubisoft's directors actually said that they were looking to include even less narrative elements in their games, in the future. The only truly narrative-driven AC game, was the first. So many people criticised it's somewhat repetitive nature, that they started focusing on different, more shallow and insipid aspects. The decline in quality has been brutal, ever since. Désilets was able to keep a good balance between the storytelling and the more shallow, open world activities. But after his departure, it all came crushing down.


If you start giving room for allowed changes to the fundamental concepts of a series (without adequate reasons), then there is technically nothing stopping it from turning into the opposite of what it originally set out to achieve and then back again - and so on - over a stretch of time. To me, this doesn't benefit anyone and I honestly hope that for the rest of the franchise they're going to stick with Odyssey's direction to prevent expectations from fluctuating constantly.
Yeah, there's nothing stopping them, and they'll definitely keep adding more and more superficial RPG elements. The canonical aspects of the series, have already been crushed badly by this game and it's premise, and I can only see it getting worse.

cawatrooper9
06-15-2018, 02:26 PM
Since there's been some discussion on the holograms in Origins- I'll admit that I was hoping for more First Civ stuff too, but this article on Access the Animus (http://www.accesstheanimus.com/Breaking_The_Code_Pt1.html) is the first in a series that show how surprisingly deep that stuff was for those who both listened and were able to understand.

And it's actually pretty complicated. No way I would've understood most of this, without Markuz's explanations.

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 02:46 PM
There isn't a logical way to explain how memories are now, supposedly, mutable. I also don't agree with the inclusion of dialogue options..

I think there is - it's based on the technical fact that outside of Ubi going back to desynching missions & forcing us to rigidly play everything the way they've ascribed to the original character (weapon choice and all), we're already deviating from 100% reliving the memory in any true sense.
Even in past games we were all playing different parts of the game our own way in side missions, looting, exploration...& not true to 'history' all thru-out the game. [if one person plays it differently than another, then it's impossible that it was originally done by the character both ways].

So we've already not been true to 100% memory all thru-out the series, it's already perverted, but you were Ok with that - So now just tack on some decision choices.....

Pasting my above answer to new RPG element - >>the unique RPG choices you make for your character is the choice that was originally made in your personal experience in the game. You essentially create your character's history. <<
This is no different imo, than what we've already been doing in how we chose to do side missions our own way & even mission fails that didn't desynch & force us to restart the mission. Many times I did a mission my own way & took the 'penalty' for it & continued on. I didn't relive the memory 100%, only before, I was notified that I did it incorrectly.

What difference does formally adding RPG make when we've already been deviating from 100% memory?

cawatrooper9
06-15-2018, 02:54 PM
There isn't a logical way to explain how memories are now, supposedly, mutable. I also don't agree with the inclusion of dialogue options.




From what I've seen, the explanation given so far has to do with this DNA being so old that it's degraded and that's what gives more leeway.

I'm curious that, given that explanation, if we'll see these RPG elements disappear if and when the series moves into a more contemporary era again.

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 03:27 PM
They might just be experimenting w/ RPG in this game to see if fans like it or not. They've tried a few different things in the past.

ProdiGurl
06-15-2018, 03:59 PM
True.

Just to make things clear, i don't agree with him saying that you are not a core fan, i agree that the ISU content in ACO was way more vague than in AC:2 or Brotherhood for example, because they turned it into optional content, without having any connections to the main storyline of ACO, and without any cutscenes of Bayek responding to what he saw whatsoever. It made it seem unimportant, especially because they were actually able to make dedicated cutscenes for trivial stuff, which made the Isu segments seem even more irrelevant, and yeah, i do think this has a lot to do with the huge group of people who don't have a soul connection to the franchise, and really have a negative impact on the cohesiveness of the overarching storyline.

This is what happens when you constantly need to think about how to expand your "fanbase" in order to maximize profits.

It's kinda funny how they can make the game bigger and put more people on it, because they keep making more profits, but that doesn't necessarily make the game better, just like how buying a huge house doesn't necessarily make your life better. Putting your heart and soul into something is the most important thing. Not turn it into a huge factory. I just love the laws of this universe.
Thanks =). I do consider myself a core fan to AC - - but not in my demands for AC to stay "pure" and follow specific AC dogma that fans attach to it from early games. I'm ecletic and open to how Ubi wants to create these games. As long as the basic format is there w/ great characters, music, gorgeous graphics, history/lore, fighting/missions are fun, then I'm great with it. There have been a few titles I didn't enjoy that much but Origins made up for it all.

Again, Ubi is a company that like any company, has to remain relevant to gamers to survive in this business. I don't understand the attacks on Ubi for being a Company that has to make decisions to stay alive & profitable. & Ubi isn't the only company that has to do it. There's so much to consider in each decision & they have many other game titles to do the same with. This isn't the most easy business to thrive in.
AC isn't being picked on for profits. ANY company wants to cater to the widest majority of their fan bases.... if you've ever owned one yourself, you'll know what that's about & what it involves.

Let me ask, how many AC fans would there be 10 yrs later if Ubi did every game in the exact same format as AC1 & wouldn't deviate from that formula just to please their "core base" of early fans? I think Ubi would be hearing crickets by now.

Oh & my bad in previous posts... I keep using "modern day" as a general def. of all the supernatural/piece of eden/modern day elements interchangeably. I think it could all be dropped & just turn it into historic action based on "being" (reliving) past Assassins in history. I'm not advocating for that, just that that's probly how many AC players basically already view it.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 04:09 PM
From what I've seen, the explanation given so far has to do with this DNA being so old that it's degraded and that's what gives more leeway.

I'm curious that, given that explanation, if we'll see these RPG elements disappear if and when the series moves into a more contemporary era again.
Degraded DNA wouldn't, logically, yield variability inside the memories. It would, obviously, lead to synchronisation problems, or the complete inability to access the memories altogether. It's simple, if you can't read the DNA, you can't access the memories. By the way, where's that explanation? When did they give that explanation about the dialogue options? It's been 5 days of E3 and I've never heard/read anything about it.

It's just so disappointing, this RPG path they've chosen to follow.The narrative is just so disregarded and disrespected, that there isn't even a canonical background anymore. Something could've happened a certain way, but then again, it might've happened a different way entirely. There's no intention of building on the foundations put into place be the precedent game. The compulsion, it seems, is just on adding or including new elements every single year, until the series becomes unrecognisable.

As many have pointed out before, this isn't AC. Odyssey is played in a time where there are no assassins around and there was no creed, to begin with. Releasing this game a year after Origins, is an insult to that game, and the fact that it's called AC, is an even bigger insult.

cawatrooper9
06-15-2018, 04:24 PM
By the way, where's that explanation? When did they give that explanation about the dialogue options? It's been 5 days of E3 and I've never heard/read anything about it.


Posted on this site's news (https://news.ubisoft.com/article/ac-odyssey-what-you-need-to-know-about-living-a-mercenarys-life-in-ancient-greece-e3-2018).

Relevant passage:


How does this new level of choice fit in with the conceit that you're reliving genetic memories of the distant past? "The DNA is old and imprecise, so it offers you the choice to pursue two characters," says Creative Director Jonathan Dumont. There's also some fuzziness in the historical record, because "[Alexios and Kassandra] come from a lost book of Herodotus – the first historian – who wrote about a hero that could be one of these two characters," adds Dumont.

I think there's an inherent suspension of disbelief required for the Animus in general. Again, I'm curious to see how this comes out in practice, and it's certainly a bold and risky move, but I don't think at this time we can necessarily say that this is lore-breaking when the science of the Animus is already heavily fictional anyway.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 04:41 PM
I think there's an inherent suspension of disbelief required for the Animus in general. Again, I'm curious to see how this comes out in practice, and it's certainly a bold and risky move, but I don't think at this time we can necessarily say that this is lore-breaking when the science of the Animus is already heavily fictional anyway.
I know full well that we have to suspend our own disbelief for the sake of the experience. It's not reality. It's not science. It's fiction. We all know that.

As I said before, if the DNA is old, then memories are inaccessible. It's that simple. You can't just create a loophole, so you can choose to whom the memories belong, decide what to say, what to do and when to do it, and generally speaking, just add the elements that you want. Or rather, you apparently can, because they just did so.

bizantura
06-15-2018, 04:48 PM
I like reading the discussions and sometimes bickering concerning AC. I am here and bought ACO because Ubisoft is willing to make SP RPG's. I liked ACO but that doesn't mean it is a perfect game but that is not what I seek in a game. I learned long ago directors, actors ect come and go and there is no such thing as continuaty for prolonged series let alone all the years AC exists. That doesn't mean I don't understand how it feels when the lore and characters change beyond personal preferences. Whitin "gaming" I think it is difficult to continue stories and threads within multiple games and give people choises to boot. Sadly that has been promoted by various publishers that you can have it all and many expect it.

I like to escape in the fantasy world created by artists thru RPG's. ACO met that expectation so with even more RPG elements installed in this game I am thrilled for the upcoming release.

Fudz4
06-15-2018, 05:41 PM
Degraded DNA wouldn't, logically, yield variability inside the memories. It would, obviously, lead to synchronisation problems, or the complete inability to access the memories altogether. It's simple, if you can't read the DNA, you can't access the memories. By the way, where's that explanation? When did they give that explanation about the dialogue options? It's been 5 days of E3 and I've never heard/read anything about it.

It's just so disappointing, this RPG path they've chosen to follow.The narrative is just so disregarded and disrespected, that there isn't even a canonical background anymore. Something could've happened a certain way, but then again, it might've happened a different way entirely. There's no intention of building on the foundations put into place be the precedent game. The compulsion, it seems, is just on adding or including new elements every single year, until the series becomes unrecognisable.

As many have pointed out before, this isn't AC. Odyssey is played in a time where there are no assassins around and there was no creed, to begin with. Releasing this game a year after Origins, is an insult to that game, and the fact that it's called AC, is an even bigger insult.

Assassins (people with eagle vision descended from ISU) predate Bayek.

Origins was the formation of the ORGANISED brotherhood known as the hidden ones. Altair reformed the hidden ones into the modern day assassins.

Bayek was given a hidden blade that belonged to a Persian assassin. Brutus and Cassius seemed to have a greater understanding of hidden stuff in Origins.

Even in AC2 in the Auditore Villa pre Bayek assassins are credited as being part of the brotherhood even if it didnt exist for them in their times.

Further more Caesar formed an organised Masked Ones order but it was reformed into knights templars in Altairs time and also the Masked Ones have clearly been around since long before Caesar.

The whole point of AC is a secret war that predates even caveman times.

Its not as if the secret war began with Caesar.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 07:10 PM
I brought this up to a friend, but we had "options" in AC2. Granted, not dialog options, but options that Ezio may or may not have performed.

It's important that it's set in stone to know if Ezio actually drank that cafe or not!

cawatrooper9
06-15-2018, 07:30 PM
I brought this up to a friend, but we had "options" in AC2. Granted, not dialog options, but options that Ezio may or may not have performed.

It's important that it's set in stone to know if Ezio actually drank that cafe or not!

Or hugged Leonardo!

Poor guy, I always manage to accidentally screw up that QTE and snub da Vinci of an Ezio hug.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 07:32 PM
Assassins (people with eagle vision descended from ISU) predate Bayek.

Origins was the formation of the ORGANISED brotherhood known as the hidden ones. Altair reformed the hidden ones into the modern day assassins.

Bayek was given a hidden blade that belonged to a Persian assassin. Brutus and Cassius seemed to have a greater understanding of hidden stuff in Origins.

Even in AC2 in the Auditore Villa pre Bayek assassins are credited as being part of the brotherhood even if it didnt exist for them in their times.

Further more Caesar formed an organised Masked Ones order but it was reformed into knights templars in Altairs time and also the Masked Ones have clearly been around since long before Caesar.

The whole point of AC is a secret war that predates even caveman times.

Its not as if the secret war began with Caesar.
Here we go... :rolleyes:

You probably assumed, wrongly, I might add, that I didn't know any of that. Well, I do. According to the AC mythology, the First Civilisation created mankind, and the precursors of mankind (Adam and Eve) escaped the grasp of the First Civilisation with one of the Pieces of Eden (the Apple). Inherently, this so-called war began there and then.

Technically speaking, AC can explore the historic period they desire. No one can stop them from doing so. However, it doesn't mean that they should, and it doesn't mean it makes sense. Origins established the modern Assassins. Whether Altaïr reformed the order or not, it's irrelevant. It all started with Origins. Which means that the exploration of the Creed, what this series is all about, hence the title Assassin's Creed (that is to say, the Creed of the Assassins), makes sense merely beyond the point of Origins, not before.

They say this game was designed to highlight the modern day period. The modern day meta-story deserves to be highlighted. However, if they want to develop the modern day meta-story, they should make a modern day-oriented game. That's long overdue.

Ultimately, though, they can do whatever they want, obviously. It's their game. They can by-pass the rules they imposed or created themselves, or simply break them, as they just did. It just means that the series destroyed it's own premise and is, therefore, dead.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 07:33 PM
Or hugged Leonardo!

Poor guy, I always manage to accidentally screw up that QTE and snub da Vinci of an Ezio hug.

I've never missed a QTE in all my playthroughs. But I watched a video about it the other day, failing the QTEs on purpose and the part about hugging Leonardo and just basically denying it made me sad! Oh his face was captured perfectly (for that time period with technology).

MageAquarius20
06-15-2018, 07:36 PM
Well Leonardo was initially supposed to be condemned for Sodomy during the part, where you carry his stuff the first time you meet him, so maybe thatīs why.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 07:42 PM
Here we go... :rolleyes:

You probably assumed, wrongly, I might add, that I didn't know any of that. Well, I do. According to the AC mythology, the First Civilisation created mankind, and the precursors of mankind (Adam and Eve) escaped the grasp of the First Civilisation with one of the Pieces of Eden (the Apple). Inherently, this so-called war began there and then.

Technically speaking, AC can explore the historic period they desire. No one can stop them from doing so. However, it doesn't that they should, and it doesn't mean it makes sense. Origins established the modern Assassins. Whether Altaïr reformed the order, it's irrelevant. It all started with Origins. Which means that the exploration of the Creed, what this series is all about, hence the title Assassin's Creed (that is to say, the Creed of the Assassins), makes sense merely beyond the point of Origins, not before.

So, this game has nothing to do with the Assassin's Creed, but rather with some aspect or some problem prevalent in the modern day. The modern day meta-story deserves to be highlighted. However, if they want to develop the modern day meta-story, they should make a modern day-oriented game. That's long overdue.

But they can do whatever they want, obviously. It's their game. They can even by-pass the rules they imposed or created themselves, or simply break them, as they just did. It just means that the series destroyed it's own premise and is, therefore, dead.

I agree with your issue regarding dialog choices. It's been bothering me since I heard about it. That being said though, the rest of your complaints don't really work. Assassin's Creed is a franchise. There was still a time period when the Order of the Ancients was long around before The Hidden Ones. And we know historically there was uprising as well, (Darius and Xerxes) which is an event that takes place before Odyssey.

So it doesn't have an official name. There's no Brotherhood or Assassins. But it does have some sort of group, and it does have assassins. It could also discuss The Order of the Ancients more, or could even be an "Origins" for them.

In addition, Odyssey is set in a time when we can see the actual Isu in person because Jupiter was also known as Zeus. We could possibly learn more about the Capitoline Triad.

Your issue with the dialog options is sound and I don't agree with it either, but Assassin's Creed, as a franchise is far more than just a Brotherhood and Assassins.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 07:45 PM
Well Leonardo was initially supposed to be condemned for Sodomy during the part, where you carry his stuff the first time you meet him, so maybe thatīs why.

What? Maybe what's why?

cawatrooper9
06-15-2018, 07:53 PM
What? Maybe what's why?

Ehh, Ezio's pretty chill. I don't think he'd be bothered by that.

MageAquarius20
06-15-2018, 07:57 PM
Here we go... :rolleyes:

NOPE... HERE I GO:


You probably assumed, wrongly, I might add, that I didn't know any of that. Well, I do. According to the AC mythology, the First Civilisation created mankind, and the precursors of mankind (Adam and Eve) escaped the grasp of the First Civilisation with one of the Pieces of Eden (the Apple). Inherently, this so-called war began there and then.

True, which is why Origins is a contradiction to the lore, even if we allowed it's hollow logic that doesn't work, like:


Technically speaking, AC can explore the historic period they desire. No one can stop them from doing so. However, it doesn't that they should, and it doesn't mean it makes sense. Origins established the modern Assassins. Whether Altaïr reformed the order, it's irrelevant. It all started with Origins. Which means that the exploration of the Creed, what this series is all about, hence the title Assassin's Creed (that is to say, the Creed of the Assassins), makes sense merely beyond the point of Origins, not before.

Wrong, Bayek didnīt founded nor did he started the Assassins, the Assassins predate him by Millenia, he just was the founder of the "tenets" the Assassins we know from the first game followed, not the very first Assasssins. Which is exacly why the concept of the game Origins sucks, because those ideas Bayek exspouse like not killing innocents, hiding behind masses,or not conpromising the brotherhood should have existed before him and it's ridicoulous that No one before him even founded Brotherhood before him, consdiering that Ancient Societies had many hidden cults wtih ideas very modern to our own, expsecially concerning the existence of Isu and other Remnands of the Human resistence led by Eve( or do you think that she wouldnīt have though about Innocent lives or the sort when leadig the resistance). Unlike with science, those are things people with the idea of freedom should come up with Naturally, exspecially when ancient cults even spreaded across the world and influencing other cultures( heck there were even Cults in greece before the said Greeks even existed).


So, this game has nothing to do with the Assassin's Creed, but rather with some aspect or some problem prevalent in the modern day. The modern day meta-story deserves to be highlighted. However, if they want to develop the modern day meta-story, they should make a modern day-oriented game. That's long overdue.

Actually the upcoming game can still have the whole freedom vs Order thing going on, considering that Athens was a slave holding Empire oppressing other Greeks that called for sparta to liberate them, so the whole story can be connected with the Assasins. William even said that Assassins and Templars existed since Prehistoric times in one form or another, further proving that Origins is pretentious about itself. I agree on Modern day, we need a game set there.


But they can do whatever they want, obviously. It's their game. They can even by-pass the rules they imposed or created themselves, or simply break them, as they just did. It just means that the series destroyed it's own premise and is, therefore, dead.

Nothing is true, everything is permitted after all, they believe AC to be thier Marvel or Mario rather than what it is: A Meta-Story about us Humans and our fate as either free beings or slaves, not a collection of personal journeys like many people Ezioīs story is about.

I am for a reboot, the lore needs to be cleaned up.

MageAquarius20
06-15-2018, 07:58 PM
What? Maybe what's why?

Yes, confirmed by Desilets himself.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 08:04 PM
Yes, confirmed by Desilets himself.

No, I don't understand what you're saying. Maybe what is why? Because Ezio didn't hug Leonardo because of the sodomy charge (that was dropped, by the way).

Your post isn't clear.


Ehh, Ezio's pretty chill. I don't think he'd be bothered by that.

I just saw this. If this is what Mage is referring to, he missed the mark as it's a player choice.

And, in DaVinci Disappearance, Ezio approves of Leonardo's boyfriend.

joelsantos24
06-15-2018, 08:25 PM
I agree with your issue regarding dialog choices. It's been bothering me since I heard about it. That being said though, the rest of your complaints don't really work. Assassin's Creed is a franchise. There was still a time period when the Order of the Ancients was long around before The Hidden Ones. And we know historically there was uprising as well, (Darius and Xerxes) which is an event that takes place before Odyssey.

So it doesn't have an official name. There's no Brotherhood or Assassins. But it does have some sort of group, and it does have assassins. It could also discuss The Order of the Ancients more, or could even be an "Origins" for them.

In addition, Odyssey is set in a time when we can see the actual Isu in person because Jupiter was also known as Zeus. We could possibly learn more about the Capitoline Triad.

Your issue with the dialog options is sound and I don't agree with it either, but Assassin's Creed, as a franchise is far more than just a Brotherhood and Assassins.
It's easy, now that Odyssey was revealed and is about to be released, to say that (apparently) AC is more than just about a Brotherhood and the Assassins.

I also said it before, they can go wherever they want, mythologically speaking, all the way to Adam and Eve. One of my theories, before Odyssey was even revealed, was that it was going to focus on the establishment of the Order of the Ancients, since Origins portrayed the establishment of the Hidden Ones as a direct response to their negative influence in Ancient Egypt. We didn't see everything in the game, but chances are, it might not even approach it.

About Darius (Artabanus) and Xerxes, no one has ever said he was an assassin. His statue was in the Sanctuary, at Montiriggioni, and it just said that he killed Xerxes. For all intents and purposes, he was just a normal citizen who opposed a tyrant (Xerxes), and decided to end his life. In doing so, it was the first recorded use of the Hidden Blade, and that's about it.

Repeating what I said before, they can do whatever they want and capture the historic period they desire, but it doesn't mean it makes sense. If it did, not as many fans would manifest against it. I'm not going to pre-order the game, or even buy it on release. I'm going to wait and see what it's going to focus on, specifically. If it focuses on what I think it will, then I pass on this one and possibly even the series itself. There are far, far, far better games out there.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 08:32 PM
It's easy, now that Odyssey was revealed and is about to be released, to say that (apparently) AC is more than just about a Brotherhood and the Assassins.

To me, it's always been about the Isu. They're the ones that started this. They're the ones that are keeping it going (albeit currently, quite poorly).


About Darius (Artabanus) and Xerxes, no one has ever said he was an assassin. His statue was in the Sanctuary, at Montiriggioni, and it just said that he killed Xerxes. For all intents and purposes, he was just a normal citizen who opposed a tyrant (Xerxes), and decided to end his life. In doing so, it was the first recorded use of the Hidden Blade, and that's about it.

He is an assassin. He might not be an "Assassin" though. It says he was a "Persian assassin" on his statue. Everything else I agree with though, in that there's not much to go on. I imagine the use of the lower case "A" is intentional in the game.


Repeating what I said before, they can do whatever they want and capture the historic period they desire, but it doesn't mean it makes sense. If it did, not as many fans would manifest against it. I'm not going to pre-order the game, or even buy it on release. I'm going to wait and see what it's going to focus on, specifically. If it focuses on what I think it will, then I pass on this one and possibly even the series itself. There are far, far, far better games out there.

I've always been a fan of the wait and see attitude. That being said, a lot of "fans" that aren't thrilled wit h this one seem to have a connection: they want it to be about an actual Assassin with a Brotherhood. Makes sense. But as I said before, AC is more than just Assassin's and Templars.

I'm even having a "wait and see" attitude myself.

MageAquarius20
06-15-2018, 08:59 PM
To me, it's always been about the Isu. They're the ones that started this. They're the ones that are keeping it going (albeit currently, quite poorly).

Considering that Juno's arc is about to be finished in the Comic books and the Isu's have now become nothing more than a refference to older games, we will not see much about in Odessey right now, it'S after all made by the same People that made Unity, who are not prown to keept their Promises., like going back to the series`s roots. The Isu's are only a part of the lore, they aren't the only players in the game, there is still the Assassins and Templars(thier children), whom`s Philosophical conflict was once the core of this series. The Isu are unfortuately underutilized due to the devs not being found in Science fiction. I plan to make a post about the first Civ and how they wasted a lot of Potential about them.


He is an assassin. He might not be an "Assassin" though. It says he was a "Persian assassin" on his statue. Everything else I agree with though, in that there's not much to go on. I imagine the use of the lower case "A" is intentional in the game.

Nee, that is just conjecture, he was a Assassin through and through, until they turned him into a proto-Assassin, becasue they couldn`t figured out a way to make Bayek interesting without needing to be revelant to the plot.



I've always been a fan of the wait and see attitude. That being said, a lot of "fans" that aren't thrilled wit h this one seem to have a connection: they want it to be about an actual Assassin with a Brotherhood. Makes sense. But as I said before, AC is more than just Assassin's and Templars.

I'm even having a "wait and see" attitude myself.

AC is about the Assassins, itīs about thier Philosophy and ideas, itīs about fighting against control like the Templars and the Isu seem to embrace. AC is about the fight between the Children of the Isu( who gave rise to both) deciding the fate of our Species. Fans are rightfully upset about the lack of Care for the lore and the lack of respect the Assassins respect, at least they could have reused the Persona system from Liberation to eradicate the suspention of apathy, but they didnīt.

One can wait and see, which i do, but what i see here is a game that isnīt going to be super unique, but could end up better than Origins, which isnīt enough to win back my trust for Ubisoft.

To the whole Leonardo thing, it was a theory i made about da vinci i donīt stand to any longer, nothing more.

MnemonicSyntax
06-15-2018, 09:46 PM
Considering that Juno's arc is about to be finished in the Comic books and the Isu's have now become nothing more than a refference to older games, we will not see much about in Odessey right now, it'S after all made by the same People that made Unity, who are not prown to keept their Promises., like going back to the series`s roots. The Isu's are only a part of the lore, they aren't the only players in the game, there is still the Assassins and Templars(thier children), whom`s Philosophical conflict was once the core of this series. The Isu are unfortuately underutilized due to the devs not being found in Science fiction. I plan to make a post about the first Civ and how they wasted a lot of Potential about them.

I don't read the comics, so this is a moot point.




Nee, that is just conjecture, he was a Assassin through and through, until they turned him into a proto-Assassin, becasue they couldn`t figured out a way to make Bayek interesting without needing to be revelant to the plot.

Proof? AC2 says he was an "assassin." There is no mention of a Brotherhood. There is no mention that he worked with anyone.

He's always been a proto-Assassin and it has nothing to do with Bayek, how interesting he is, or the plot. The mention of Darius and his hidden blade isn't even enough to go on and doesn't even apply to Bayek regarding any sort of Brotherhood.

Bayek is interesting on his own because he doesn't care about any Brotherhood until he realizes he's lost it all. His whole purpose is revenge, which while cliche, he manages to teach others experiencing similar loss that revenge isn't the answer. This isn't something that commonly seen in revenge stories.




AC is about the Assassins, itīs about thier Philosophy and ideas, itīs about fighting against control like the Templars and the Isu seem to embrace. AC is about the fight between the Children of the Isu( who gave rise to both) deciding the fate of our Species. Fans are rightfully upset about the lack of Care for the lore and the lack of respect the Assassins respect, at least they could have reused the Persona system from Liberation to eradicate the suspention of apathy, but they didnīt.

What lack of care for the lore? You've already talked about conjecture without any evidence. In addition, the persona system was miserable. There's a reason why it wasn't continued in later games.


One can wait and see, which i do, but what i see here is a game that isnīt going to be super unique, but could end up better than Origins, which isnīt enough to win back my trust for Ubisoft.

To the whole Leonardo thing, it was a theory i made about da vinci i donīt stand to any longer, nothing more.

What I don't understand is, if Ubisoft has been letting you down for so long, why are you still here? You're free to of course give your opinion but according to you it's been going downhill since... what? Revelations? That's a long time to hold out hope, man.

MageAquarius20
06-15-2018, 11:02 PM
I don't read the comics, so this is a moot point.

The Isu plot is currently handled in the Comics and is where Junoīs arc is going to end. I brought it up to show you how the Isu lost revenance to the plot.No need to be this dsimissive of valid points.


Proof? AC2 says he was an "assassin." There is no mention of a Brotherhood. There is no mention that he worked with anyone.

He's always been a proto-Assassin and it has nothing to do with Bayek, how interesting he is, or the plot. The mention of Darius and his hidden blade isn't even enough to go on and doesn't even apply to Bayek regarding any sort of Brotherhood.

Bayek is interesting on his own because he doesn't care about any Brotherhood until he realizes he's lost it all. His whole purpose is revenge, which while cliche, he manages to teach others experiencing similar loss that revenge isn't the answer. This isn't something that commonly seen in revenge stories.

Read again my post, i never talked about a Brotherhood, i talked about Darius being an Assassin, which he was (even the game said it) until they retconned him into a proto-Assassin( so no true Assassin). Neither the lore nor anyone called him a Proto Assassin in the past, not even William miles, only very recently with the coming of Origins. The sancturay also contained Qualan Gal and Altair( the greatest Assassin to ever have existed),whom we know that they were members of the Assassins Brotherhood, so the logical conclusion for the other Assassinsīs occuptation would be that they are members of the brotherhood with no contradiction saying otherwise. If your argument was that you need to be a member of a Brotherhood in order to be part of a Assassin, then you have never heard of Connor. He was in AC 3 the only Assassin we played as(except Desmond in the Modern era) and he was no member to any Brotherhood, yet he was an actual Assassin, so no your argument is wrong. Now if you argument was that there were no Assassin-like orders then you have to consider Iltani, who was part of a Order of Asssassins. Even if we agreed that they were Proto-Assassins then, technically speaking, Bayek should be considered a Proto-Assassin as well, because the actual Brotherhood of Assassins was founded by Hassan I Sabbah, who founded the Brotherhood from the first game and not Bayek, see why Origins is a flawed concept that made no sense whatsoever to the AC mythos?

Bayek began to form with Aya the Brotherhood because they were fed up with Tyrants and wanted to protect the Innocents rather than fighting for the freedom of the People. Bayek is very dedicated to the brotherhood after the main story, he even killled Gamilat for breaking his newly made Creed that existed before him. Also his story was only unique in the sense that the roles are diffrent this time. He is the father, who lost his child, not the Child himself and that he handled it way better than most people, who want vengeance, everything else is already done. The whole, "revenge is not the answer" was already handled in AC 2, brotherhood and even God of War. The " I donīt care about any brotherhood until some life changing events" was already handled in AC4 with Edward and not nearly as well done as it. Bayekīs greatest Character strenghts are his strong faith in the Egyptian gods(so he didnīt really lost everything), his Compassion for the pain of others, his badassery and his strong sense of justice. He isnīt really super deep, but as Character much better than Arno and the Frye twins.

Oh and what care of the lore you might ask? Shall i give you examples? The shoehorning of the Juno arc into a Comic for instance like i already mentioned, The whole wasted potential of the sages, the existence of the Precursor sites in Rougue, the entirety of Origins, the wasted potential of a Shao Jun game and finally the dialougue with no real Context behind it like in Unity. AC Lore has devolved over the years into a soulless RPG game that lost much of it's geatness due to fan demands of less history, less AC lore and less story telling. You donīt need to be a genius to realize this, just the simple power of Obbservation things as they are and they are not looking good for now.

Like i said, itīs about the Assassins Creed and as such the Assassins are the main heroes who need to be the foucs on the story, they are the ones that need to be made the best stuff in the plot and that comes from a Isu lover. The Isu are very important, they can be both the supporters of the Assassins or thier Enemies, they serve as the ultimate ideal to both Templars and Assassins alike, beings, who achieved both Freedom and Order alike. If you want to make things more focused about them, you need to give them some qualities of the Assasssins, because no one wants to be Juno, rather a new and unknown Isu like maybe Neptune or something.

Maybe Oddessey is going to be good, but your arenīt going to convine to like it., the game has to do it.

MnemonicSyntax
06-16-2018, 12:30 AM
The Isu plot is currently handled in the Comics and is where Junoīs arc is going to end. I brought it up to show you how the Isu lost revenance to the plot.No need to be this dsimissive of valid points.

It's not a valid point because Ubisoft knows that it has fans of it's franchise that don't read the comics. It wouldn't just end the arc in the comics and not also mention it somehow in-game either.




Read again my post, i never talked about a Brotherhood, i talked about Darius being an Assassin, which he was (even the game said it) until they retconned him into a proto-Assassin( so no true Assassin).

Nothing was retconned. Darius was never an Assassin proper. He was an assassin. Not an Assassin. The two are not mutually exclusive to each other. One is a person who assassinated someone, the other belongs to an order meant to safeguard the free will of society.

In AC2, he is labeled as an "assassin." They made him a "proto-Assassin" because of his contribution of the hidden blade and he was the first recorded person to take down a tyrant as well, again, guarding that free-will. That has nothing to do with Origins, because it's not plot specific except the tidbit on how the hidden blade came to be.

So again, he was NEVER a "true Assassin."


Neither the lore nor anyone called him a Proto Assassin in the past, not even William miles, only very recently with the coming of Origins. The sancturay also contained Qualan Gal and Altair( the greatest Assassin to ever have existed),whom we know that they were members of the Assassins Brotherhood, so the logical conclusion for the other Assassinsīs occuptation would be that they are members of the brotherhood with no contradiction saying otherwise.

There is. The lowercase A is indictative of being an assassin as having done the act of an assassination. It's in AC2. If he was labeled otherwise, with a capital A, your point would be valid.


If your argument was that you need to be a member of a Brotherhood in order to be part of a Assassin, then you have never heard of Connor. He was in AC 3 the only Assassin we played as(except Desmond in the Modern era) and he was no member to any Brotherhood, yet he was an actual Assassin, so no your argument is wrong.

He wasn't a member of a Brotherhood? Yet he had a mentor (Achilles) and had other members in his Brotherhood, including Robert Faulkner? And those are two right there without even mentioning Stephane Chapeau, Duncan Little, Jacob Zenger, Clipper Wilkinson, Jamie Colley and Dobby Carter? All members of the colonial rite.

And, there was a valid and official Brotherhood in place, until Shay wiped them all out.

Regardless, having a Brotherhood doesn't make him an Assassin. Darius was only an assassin because he assassinated Xerxes. He was made a proto-Assassin because of his ideals in assassinating Xerxes and providing the hidden blade, which became the staple of the Brotherhood.


Now if you argument was that there were no Assassin-like orders then you have to consider Iltani, who was part of a Order of Asssassins. Even if we agreed that they were Proto-Assassins then, technically speaking, Bayek should be considered a Proto-Assassin as well, because the actual Brotherhood of Assassins was founded by Hassan I Sabbah, who founded the Brotherhood from the first game and not Bayek, see why Origins is a flawed concept that made no sense whatsoever to the AC mythos?

It's not flawed. Bayek is a proto-Assassin. Again, Bayek didn't start the Assassin Brotherhood, he (and more importantly, Aya) started the The Hidden Ones. It would take hundreds of years to iron it out to become the Assassin Brotherhood we know today. A proto-Assassin is just someone who received an honorary place as an Assassin in the Brotherhood because of their ideals (safeguarding free will).


Bayek began to form with Aya the Brotherhood because they were fed up with Tyrants and wanted to protect the Innocents rather than fighting for the freedom of the People. Bayek is very dedicated to the brotherhood after the main story, he even killled Gamilat for breaking his newly made Creed that existed before him. Also his story was only unique in the sense that the roles are diffrent this time. He is the father, who lost his child, not the Child himself and that he handled it way better than most people, who want vengeance, everything else is already done. The whole, "revenge is not the answer" was already handled in AC 2,

It wasn't until the end of AC2 that Ezio realized that killing Rodrigo wasn't the solution. Bayek had figured that out after he killed the Ibis. In various side quests he talks with other characters who are suffering similar to what he was, and he attempted to comfort him.

Besides, revenge is a good motivator for a guy that's just trying to live his life and has now had it taken from him completely. Revenge is a everywhere. John Wick comes to mind for example. It's a natural trope that works.


brotherhood

Ezio didn't want to kill the Borgia for revenge in Brotherhood. He did it to stop Borgia reign.


and even God of War.

Don't play that game, so I wouldn't know. It's not a Ubisoft game anyway, so it's not really relevant if your point is revenge is overdone by Ubisoft.


The " I donīt care about any brotherhood until some life changing events" was already handled in AC4 with Edward and not nearly as well done as it.

Edward joined the Brotherhood for redemption. It's a stretch to compare Bayek's and Edwards "life changing events" because they're completely different. Bayek joined the "Brotherhood" because he had nothing left. He wasn't a father, a husband and he wasn't a Medjay His whole life, as he knew it, was gone.


Bayekīs greatest Character strenghts are his strong faith in the Egyptian gods(so he didnīt really lost everything), his Compassion for the pain of others, his badassery and his strong sense of justice. He isnīt really super deep, but as Character much better than Arno and the Frye twins.

He lost everything he cared about. He lost his son to his own hand, and he lost his wife who was more interested in serving the back-stabbing Cleopatra. Having faith when you lose everything causes that faith to slip away.

As for Arno and the Frye twins... okay? That's a different topic altogether and doesn't really relate to anything we've discussed here.


Oh and what care of the lore you might ask? Shall i give you examples? The shoehorning of the Juno arc into a Comic for instance like i already mentioned, The whole wasted potential of the sages, the existence of the Precursor sites in Rougue, the entirety of Origins, the wasted potential of a Shao Jun game and finally the dialougue with no real Context behind it like in Unity. AC Lore has devolved over the years into a soulless RPG game that lost much of it's geatness due to fan demands of less history, less AC lore and less story telling. You donīt need to be a genius to realize this, just the simple power of Obbservation things as they are and they are not looking good for now.

Observation? But you can't tell the difference in assassin versus Assassin.

- Juno Arc in the comics: Don't know anything about that.
- Sages are still something viable. I don't know what they plan on doing with them, if anything, but it's certainly a way to free Juno in the future.
- The precursor sites were pretty cut and dry. They're used for a foundation to basically prevent the world from collapsing and were put there by the Isu in order to try to stop the Great Catastrophe.
- What was wasted about Shao Jun? Because it wasn't a "standard" AC game and instead a side-scroller?
- Unity's story is just... I'm not a fan of that. So that's one.


Like i said, itīs about the Assassins Creed and as such the Assassins are the main heroes who need to be the foucs on the story, they are the ones that need to be made the best stuff in the plot and that comes from a Isu lover. The Isu are very important, they can be both the supporters of the Assassins or thier Enemies, they serve as the ultimate ideal to both Templars and Assassins alike, beings, who achieved both Freedom and Order alike. If you want to make things more focused about them, you need to give them some qualities of the Assasssins, because no one wants to be Juno, rather a new and unknown Isu like maybe Neptune or something.

But that's not the story of the Isu at all. It wasn't a lover. Humans were made to serve the Isu, including their desires. The offspring of the two made humans that had "the gift" and were able to fight the Apple's enthrallment. It also gave them other abilities like Eagle Vision. It's those gifted humans that are fighting the Isu because they're "woke" to see that they were being treated as nothing but cattle.


Maybe Oddessey is going to be good, but your arenīt going to convine to like it., the game has to do it.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything except that your views of the "lore" are in many cases, incorrect. Some of it is true, but some of it seems to be pieces of information you sort of assembled yourself and it's not really correct. There are times where the lore is ignored or trashed, but it's not as bad as you keep insisting it is, and it doesn't need a reboot either.

ZBurris
06-16-2018, 01:37 AM
So I've been really interested to how Quebec would've built the storyline in this game. We do know that we play as a mercenary instead of an Assassin (pre-ending) and that we won't have a creed, so why call it Assassin's Creed? Obviously the story will be different and not contain the usual story aspects, but I still believe Assassin's Creed is a fitting name aside from the present time, the first civilization and the pieces of Eden.

I think we will understand this at the most during the ending, where having multiple endings based on our choices will decide if we fit in a Greece of order, or freedom. As stated by the creative director, Jonathan Dumont during the E3 conference: "In this land shaped by the gods, raises a conflict between order, and "chaos"," where chaos is the definition of freedom. This is 431 BC, freedom as a way of rulership is not only just on the rise by the Spartan's enemy, but literally is the opposite compared to the way Spartans during this time rule their society. Ofcourse they would define the ideology of the enemy and the opposite of their own rulership chaos.

I read a youtube comment saying that Sparta literally stands for strict ruling and order. The Templar ideology.

On the other hand, the Athenians as already stated shaped western democracy and freedom. Will our different endings portrait which side our character seeks? Do you as the player, want to play as a "Templar" or an "Assassin", two different factions not yet invented as an order or a creed (Templars vs Assassins), but as ideologies. The conflict between order, and freedom, Spartans and Athenians. Just a speculation.

Choosing the Athenian side will result in an ending maybe meeting Darius, the first recorded Assassin that used the hidden blade and still is alive during the time of this game (Darius I (550 BCE – October 486 BCE)). Will one of the ending scenes see Alexios or Kassandra put on the hidden blade used by Darius?

OR

Maybe choosing the Spartan side will result in an ending seeing your character march with the Spartans, fullfilling your father's wish and build the groundworks of the Templar ideology.


Again, the RPG aspect that Quebec "are pushing the franchise into". Overall, it fits in the Assassin's Creed lore, it has always been a conflict between the two ideologies and we will definetaly experience that. So is it Assassin's Creed? :confused:

Those are great ideas man. I hope their plan is similar.

MageAquarius20
06-16-2018, 05:09 PM
So I've been really interested to how Quebec would've built the storyline in this game. We do know that we play as a mercenary instead of an Assassin (pre-ending) and that we won't have a creed, so why call it Assassin's Creed? Obviously the story will be different and not contain the usual story aspects, but I still believe Assassin's Creed is a fitting name aside from the present time, the first civilization and the pieces of Eden.

I think we will understand this at the most during the ending, where having multiple endings based on our choices will decide if we fit in a Greece of order, or freedom. As stated by the creative director, Jonathan Dumont during the E3 conference: "In this land shaped by the gods, raises a conflict between order, and "chaos"," where chaos is the definition of freedom. This is 431 BC, freedom as a way of rulership is not only just on the rise by the Spartan's enemy, but literally is the opposite compared to the way Spartans during this time rule their society. Ofcourse they would define the ideology of the enemy and the opposite of their own rulership chaos.

I read a youtube comment saying that Sparta literally stands for strict ruling and order. The Templar ideology.

On the other hand, the Athenians as already stated shaped western democracy and freedom. Will our different endings portrait which side our character seeks? Do you as the player, want to play as a "Templar" or an "Assassin", two different factions not yet invented as an order or a creed (Templars vs Assassins), but as ideologies. The conflict between order, and freedom, Spartans and Athenians. Just a speculation.

Choosing the Athenian side will result in an ending maybe meeting Darius, the first recorded Assassin that used the hidden blade and still is alive during the time of this game (Darius I (550 BCE – October 486 BCE)). Will one of the ending scenes see Alexios or Kassandra put on the hidden blade used by Darius?

OR

Maybe choosing the Spartan side will result in an ending seeing your character march with the Spartans, fullfilling your father's wish and build the groundworks of the Templar ideology.


Again, the RPG aspect that Quebec "are pushing the franchise into". Overall, it fits in the Assassin's Creed lore, it has always been a conflict between the two ideologies and we will definetaly experience that. So is it Assassin's Creed?

The Atheninans were the ones, who stood for tyranny and oppression in this Conflict, as they enslaved and conquered other Greek cities and forced them to assimilate to thier Culture. Thier entire political system is pretty much an oligarchy as opposed to an actual democracy like our own, only rich and Male people could vote, not the People, THEY WERE THE PARAGONS OF ORDER. Sparta is the paragon of freedom here, they tried to free the other Greek Cities from Athenian oppression after said Cities cried for help, which sparta answered swiftly and brutal. On top of that, they also were far more nicer to their Woman than the Athenians, who saw them as cattle. Spartan woman could own property and even hold the household as opposed to the Athenians. THatīs why we fought against the Athenians, because they are the ones trying to enslave everyone, Sparta would only then become a villian much after that, when they started to conquer thebes.

ProdiGurl
06-16-2018, 06:22 PM
When Xerxes messengers came at the beginning of 300, they were shocked that Leonidas let a woman speak to them with any authority. That's pretty much what the movie portrayed of Spartans.
I love that movie - I bet when you watch it, you literally gain some testosterone lol

CalgaryJay
06-16-2018, 09:05 PM
The Atheninans were the ones, who stood for tyranny and oppression in this Conflict, as they enslaved and conquered other Greek cities and forced them to assimilate to thier Culture. Thier entire political system is pretty much an oligarchy as opposed to an actual democracy like our own, only rich and Male people could vote, not the People, THEY WERE THE PARAGONS OF ORDER. Sparta is the paragon of freedom here, they tried to free the other Greek Cities from Athenian oppression after said Cities cried for help, which sparta answered swiftly and brutal. On top of that, they also were far more nicer to their Woman than the Athenians, who saw them as cattle. Spartan woman could own property and even hold the household as opposed to the Athenians. THatīs why we fought against the Athenians, because they are the ones trying to enslave everyone, Sparta would only then become a villian much after that, when they started to conquer thebes.

I'm sure the Messenians would disagree with Sparta being considered a liberator.. their entire city-state had basically become a slave-state of Sparta to do their bidding, and were brutally surpressed whenever they tried to free themselves. Also, was it that Spartan men were nicer to their women, or that Spartan women were every bit as tough and brutal as the men, thus earning their more equal place within Spartan society? I'd argue anyone who can leave their baby to die in the elements simply due to not displaying perceived desirable Spartan traits as an infant (i.e. too ''soft'') is probably a pretty intense and unforgiving personality.

I get what you're saying, on how the Athenians had a dark side and controlled other areas by force..pretty much every empire is guilty of that. But in terms of popular opinion, Athens is the birthplace of democracy, philosophy, and thus, ''freedom''. Meanwhile, Sparta was a rigid, very strong military state built on war and order. Purely speculation of course, but to me, this game and the character(s) we'll be playing will represent the birthplace of the Order.

HDinHB
06-16-2018, 10:03 PM
Sparta is the paragon of freedom here...

Sparta was a paragon of many things, but, apart from some excellent writing and acting in 300, I'm not sure freedom in the broadest sense was one of them



To me, it's always been about the Isu. They're the ones that started this. They're the ones that are keeping it going (albeit currently, quite poorly).

To be fair, they've been mostly dead for a really long time. The writers and devs don't have the same excuse.

raddevbor
06-16-2018, 11:31 PM
.(..)Edit: Btw, how can I quote someone? I pressed the little + sign next to the "Reply" button, but it does nothing. Also, clicking the "Rely" button doesn't seem to work either. Is it my browser's fault, or did I do something wrong in this process?

When you press 'the little + sign next to the "Reply" button' a small window should pop-up where you can choose from "Reply with quote" or "Multi-quote this message" options.

joshoolhorst
06-17-2018, 02:52 AM
Well because I can't sleep I better spend my time doing something.

When I saw the E3 stream I only realised that I was watching an Assassin's Creed game when I noticed the engine and the animations this could easily be it's own franchise hell AC was original a Prince of Persia game and dialoge choices I mean really you know what I just go back to: Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Witcher, Final Fantasy, Kotor, Deus Ex and The Walking Dead S1 they are far better than the current AC and more accurate to the original ideas behind the franchise and probably matter at the end of the day.

I just wish they made a new franchise out of this they just slammed the AC logo on this for marketing sake.

ModernWaffle
06-17-2018, 12:28 PM
Well because I can't sleep I better spend my time doing something.

When I saw the E3 stream I only realised that I was watching an Assassin's Creed game when I noticed the engine and the animations this could easily be it's own franchise hell AC was original a Prince of Persia game and dialoge choices I mean really you know what I just go back to: Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Witcher, Final Fantasy, Kotor, Deus Ex and The Walking Dead S1 they are far better than the current AC and more accurate to the original ideas behind the franchise and probably matter at the end of the day.

I just wish they made a new franchise out of this they just slammed the AC logo on this for marketing sake.

Even before E3, when I read the leaks regarding the new avenues for player choice I glanced over them quickly because they seemed such odd additions. In retrospect I don't think I was inherently against adding dialogue options (I'm not really bothered by lore accuracy etc.) but I think they are introducing them at the completely wrong time:

1. As joshoolhorst points out, there are already a lot of existing franchises that focus on the idea of dialogue choices and multiple endings. IIRC Mass Effect was the first mainstream series to explore this avenue and that was all the way back in 2007. I mean, they might work in Odyssey though it's weird for them to market dialogue options as a highlighted new feature as such when they're not really in terms of the gaming scene as a whole.

2. Related to the first point, Origins set the expectation that Ubisoft was now paying more attention to lingering criticisms of the franchise in the context of the year break and how the game itself seemed to have taken into account of a notable number of past fan requests (e.g. visiting Egypt, having a hood toggle, tombs returning in some capacity, making side quests feel more meaningful). So I think by logic people were expecting this trend to continue with Odyssey, with any new addition included being closely related to community feedback. Dialogue options, among other new things introduced in Odyssey, were never in this discussion.

3. Because of 1. and 2. I think they would have been much better off introducing dialogue options in the installment after this supposed ancient trilogy where people would have expected more extreme change as natural progression and at a point where they could have done something really new with the whole feature of dialogue options that hasn't been seen in any other game previously. Could still be the case I guess, but I haven't seen anything so far indicating that they've revolutionized the existing system.


TL: DR Having more time to ponder about this, I think Odyssey (as it is) could have been much better received by the whole community if only Ubisoft were able to set clear expectations for their fans instead of being unpredictable.

ProdiGurl
06-17-2018, 12:56 PM
Now those 3 points I can support & agree with. It's more the timing & way the changes have been done - taking people by complete surprise. But I still support these changes bcuz I like added variety & it gives it replay value in choosing different options as different characters.

They can list franchise games that also have Dialog options but so what? As far as I'm concerned after all this time in gaming, there's very little that hasn't already been done to one degree or another in all these games. After RDR's hunting, we saw hunting added into some games too - it didn't make it a bad idea.
AC hasn't offered RPG, so it's "new" to AC & might ultimately be a good direction to take? I won't know until I play it.

Kiroku
06-17-2018, 12:58 PM
So according to this interview the whole main story from odyssey will be about the conflict between order and chaos which lets us conclude that the rumours about the origin of the templars being a major part in this game can be true. Especially with the first civ being involved.

Im really really interested in the game and I think I will preorder it next month.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNVqHqBjc7o



Here is another video about the full in depth look into each skill from each skill tree:

Some of those stealth skills seem pretty promising. I like the skill were we are able to vanish for a short time to prepare another ambush.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTzxAS4Tn1k

ProdiGurl
06-17-2018, 01:30 PM
Great vid. I'm LOVING these abilities - so we can recruit up to 4 crew members too - I love having a wolf we can tame & use to help in fighting... I like how there's only one bow & it's the arrows that do different things - no darts, you use specific arrows to put them to sleep, etc. (still hoping there's poison!).

I usually do heavy upgrading in the Warrior skill tree - bullrush is awesome & that Sparta Kick is a must have!
Ring of chaos looks great when there's a few enemies at a time to stunt back.
Invisibility (outside of combat), slow motion,... too many to list that I have to have.
Their moves are great & the fighting looks fiercer which imo has to be that way for obvious reasons. I just hope they give you the feel of power as you fight. That satisfying feeling of connecting your strikes.
This looks amazing - I'm even more Xcited about this after seeing our skills & abilities!

Samwood231
06-17-2018, 03:24 PM
First off I am a huge creed fan since day one, got a tattoo on my arm, I'm that much of a fanboy. Not sure about odyssey but will give it a go for sure.

As much as I like the way the series is going in general with both the more RPG type design and rebuilt combat, I still feel the modern day is lacking a bit.

I think it would have been cool if they had one studio developing the floating iPad into an actual character. An antagonist working with the templers and made a game surrounding the templer modern day, along side layla's modern day working with the assassin's. They could have built the series up by having each character use the animus to find new ancient relics. Eventually leading the those two archetypes to meet.

Just think that would have been cool 😎.

MnemonicSyntax
06-17-2018, 04:03 PM
Great vid. I'm LOVING these abilities - so we can recruit up to 4 crew members too - I love having a wolf we can tame & use to help in fighting... I like how there's only one bow & it's the arrows that do different things - no darts, you use specific arrows to put them to sleep, etc. (still hoping there's poison!).

I usually do heavy upgrading in the Warrior skill tree - bullrush is awesome & that Sparta Kick is a must have!
Ring of chaos looks great when there's a few enemies at a time to stunt back.
Invisibility (outside of combat), slow motion,... too many to list that I have to have.
Their moves are great & the fighting looks fiercer which imo has to be that way for obvious reasons. I just hope they give you the feel of power as you fight. That satisfying feeling of connecting your strikes.
This looks amazing - I'm even more Xcited about this after seeing our skills & abilities!

Why do you use a different font? I have a hard time reading it when I'm on my cellphone.

Impeerator-
06-17-2018, 05:43 PM
I personally think that we can't decide jet we only have seen one Irland. The thing is that we have seen also with the origins demo that we realy don't get an feel of the game and more a feel of the new things wich are unique to the game. That is also here the case we see a lot of new things. I think we get an normal AC gameplay and the part shown is only an very extreem version of the new changes. Don't get me totally wrong im also consirnt about them but the thing as "you can choos your side" is PR-**** in my opinon. Its like in Syndicate you can choos if you libarate london or only kill the big boss. You still get put on one side and only decide if you just want your revenge (Ac is always (personally means motivation of main character) about revenge) or also want an better live for the rest of people. But again we have to wait and see but at the momend it looks like it would be so.
Another piont is the missing Lore/AC artifakts (hidden blade). In my opinon there will be an conection. Nobody ever said that the Bayek-Assasins were the only or first ones. It can defenitly be that the creed as we now it is an fusion of multibel creeds with the same goal. Remember Bayek founded "The hidden ones" and not the Assasins! I think that it will be like in Origins we start "unassasinscreede" and move to an mor AC like playstyle. This was the case so in origins. Also the hiddenblade will make an return. I think like in ACO(need to clarify Origins) we dont have the blade from the start on and the demo at e3 just was an bad choosen exampel. It is likly that the E3-Demo is in the first third of the game (the level isen't an argumend it also was tweekt in the ACO demos!(level 20 in Siwa ;)).
Im also was consirt with the dialogu option that they trigger Qest. I thougt that you would miss out on Quest that way and lose that sweed 100% sincronisation. But the Quest seem only minor and are only for Story reasons, so i think thats again PR-****.
So overall i would say wait for gamescom in august and see another region. And keep in mind that A: that are demos to get non-franchise-fans and the main game is difrent (see ACO) and B: it's Ubisoft they never befor made a **** AC game (not counting Bugs... yes unity was an disaster but i still loved it.(story/gamplay/world wise).

So im farly confident that i will like the game even if the Demo was bad. We will see ;)

Ps: pleeees exuse all spelling mistakes im realy not good at english spelling...

Bro-Satan
06-17-2018, 06:14 PM
I'm curious how Assassin's Creed Odyssey will be. I am very pleased with the location of the game because of the time period there are many opportunities for missions and also breathtaking landscapes to explore.

I think it's great that you can probably personalize the equipment again and I really hope that you get back buildable and manageable hideouts. You're supposed to be a mercenary, so it would be great if you could buy business that would bring money, equipment, and benefits.
And I and all those who I know really want to have a hideout again, which serves as a kind of home, which you can build from nothing to beautiful with accompanying missions.
For example, an island that is acquired in the course of the missions and constantly builds and peopled with allies. These then bring life and benefits to the island and at some point you have a piece of paradise for which it is worth fighting and where you like to come back again and again. In a game of this size, it is even possible to make several hideouts of different kinds, from the misterious hidden hideout in the mountain to the city villa in Athens.
In Origins I was really missing that you had no Hideout as in Black Flag, AC 3 or Unity, But this game offers so many possibilities!

Bro-Satan
06-17-2018, 06:39 PM
I hope very much that this time Ubisoft succeeds in perfecting the final quality of the game, so we do not need twenty patches again, which cause more problems than fix them.

And my hopes are that there will be more interiors with more variety this time, and for the sake of Zeus, there will be more conversations for the NPCs.
I'm a bit skeptical about how Ubisoft wants to do the implementation with the different answer options and how it fits into an Assassin's Creed game, but I do not prejudge that before I play the game myself, because there are ways in which such options can exist in the Animus ,

What annoyed me otherwise in Origins was the fact that if I liberated a occupied house from enemy soldiers, but they kept coming back. I have always wished so much that the previous owner comes back to get everything back in order and again filled his home with life. So if we release places within the game that also change with the course of the game, when you come back again, it just feels like damn, I've moved something, I've changed something, a successful day

If you like my ideas please share with luck it reads a developer or employee of Ubisoft.

If interested, I like to write more ideas I'm full of it with over 10 years of Assassin's Creed experience

Kiroku
06-19-2018, 12:07 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWmXyVuxNf0

suchymisiaczek
06-22-2018, 12:36 PM
I think that ac as strict RPG game (dialogues, decisions, various endings, character selection) is very bad idea. Odyssey should be without AC in title - like new RPG IP from ubi. For me Odysey as new IP is great idea, but not as new AC.

karoomii
06-22-2018, 02:22 PM
@suchymisiaczek yeah I agree. I can't remember which interview it was, but I think the creative director of the game (?) said that Ubisoft wanted to be able to have people tell their own story, their own Odyssey, so why not set up an Assassin's Creed game in Greece, the place most known for its Odysseys.

When he said that, it felt like they shoved Assassin's Creed in there just as an easy marketing move. It seemed pretty forced. But if I'm being honest here, as wrong as an RPG is for AC, the lore of the games have been so off that at this point it doesn't make a difference to me. I like parkour, I like being sneaky, and if they have nice assassin outfits I'll get the game.

DragonHuang97
06-23-2018, 07:11 AM
I've been playing every single game in AC series and actually I'm not playing many other games. Personally I'm disappointed with Odyssey, and possibly with Origins since the focus of the series is deviating from the points that initially turned me into an AC fan, and it's pretty clear that they are, instead, trying to incorporate all the successful elements in other games in order to promote the sales perhaps. The general trend of gaming in today's world is RPG, fantasies and these are exactly the elements being emphasized in the more recent games of the series. With these they are now discarding historical realism and adding magical creatures and gods for us to fight and setting strict levels so we are restricted in certain regions and are forced to finish the side quests before progressing in the game. For AC gamers it's yet another game but for pure AC fans like me, it's really disappointed to see the series gradually losing its uniqueness.
(Btw I really hate the idea of strict level setting in Origins and I even wonder whether any player would enjoy it. What's the point of literally FORBIDDING players to fight enemies in specific areas by setting such constraints? And logically it makes no sense when you cut someone's throat for 100 times and he's still alive!)

Kiroku
06-23-2018, 11:34 AM
I really like the new skill tree btw.

In origins we had so many useless skills we had to skill to get further in some paths like more exp for assassinations, headshot exp, care two bows and tons of other bow skills we actually dont need.

In Odyssey there is a skilltree just for assassin playstyle with useful skills that really makes it a better experience regarding stealth game. Im excited to try this out.

joelsantos24
06-23-2018, 11:40 AM
So according to this interview the whole main story from odyssey will be about the conflict between order and chaos which lets us conclude that the rumours about the origin of the templars being a major part in this game can be true. Especially with the first civ being involved.
The Templars evolved from the Order of the Ancients, just as the Assassins evolved from the Hidden One's. The Order of the Ancients was founded by the Pharaoh Smenkhkare, around 1334 BC (see the figure bellow, showing the Order worshipping the head of the Pharaoh). The Hidden One's were established by Bayek, in response to the power, influence and danger represented by the Order of the Ancients.

I know many people want this game to mean something, but it doesn't. It's not an AC game. It doesn't portray anything of relevance, and it most certainly doesn't showcase the foundation of the Order of the Ancients.

http://fragtist.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/fragtist-assassins-creed-origins-order-of-the-ancients.jpg

ProdiGurl
06-23-2018, 12:20 PM
I really like the new skill tree btw.

In origins we had so many useless skills we had to skill to get further in some paths like more exp for assassinations, headshot exp, care two bows and tons of other bow skills we actually dont need.

In Odyssey there is a skilltree just for assassin playstyle with useful skills that really makes it a better experience regarding stealth game. Im excited to try this out.
I agree, I skipped alot of them - didn't put anything into bow & arrow & didn't choose any extra XP skills becuz I was leveling too fast with the side missions & hunting I was doing.
I'm really hoping they balanced the leveling out in this one better than Origins bcuz I had to skip alot of side missions & other random things .



For AC gamers it's yet another game but for pure AC fans like me, it's really disappointed to see the series gradually losing its uniqueness.
(Btw I really hate the idea of strict level setting in Origins and I even wonder whether any player would enjoy it. What's the point of literally FORBIDDING players to fight enemies in specific areas by setting such constraints? And logically it makes no sense when you cut someone's throat for 100 times and he's still alive!)
Well most video games have some constraints set somewhere or push you along a certain path - you're welcome to your entire opinion on game direction but what I don't get is that the early 'pure' AC games have been littered with strict constraints in missions but you're fine with those.
For me it's just the opposite, I don't care that I can't go into specific areas at certain points of the game but I do care about freedom to choose which way I want to do missions.

joelsantos24
06-23-2018, 12:30 PM
How irrational is it, to be "viewing" memories of passed events, and still be able to choose character gender, have dialogue options and lead to multiple endings? Some people will always buy into anything, just for that symbol on the cover.

ProdiGurl
06-23-2018, 12:45 PM
How irrational is it, to be "viewing" memories of passed events, and still be able to choose character gender, have dialogue options and lead to multiple endings? Some people will always buy into anything, just for that symbol on the cover.
The same way it's irrational for all of us to be playing the same single character's memories, yet all playing out our missions differently now that full synch. is removed - no longer being forced to play missions the same way our Assassin did .....
they're GAMES.

joelsantos24
06-23-2018, 01:37 PM
Whilst playing a mission, and having been given an objective, everything you do subsequently, provided you accomplish those goals, is considered a true reflection of what actually happened. On the other hand, when you choose character genres, dialogue options and the ending, that's not "suppressing your disbelief for the sake of the experience", that's actually called nonsense, false, untrue, incorrect, inaccurate, etc.

You can do whatever you want. You can say whatever you desire. You can think whatever is more convenient to you. Nothing will erase that act. You may not like it, but you do have to live with it. AC is dead.

For all those true AC fans out there, if you want to know what really happens in this game, you're better off reading the book.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40p33q2u8AU

Megas_Doux
06-23-2018, 05:37 PM
Interesting video there, indeed.

joshoolhorst
06-23-2018, 05:54 PM
Whilst playing a mission, and having been given an objective, everything you do subsequently, provided you accomplish those goals, is considered a true reflection of what actually happened. On the other hand, when you choose character genres, dialogue options and the ending, that's not "suppressing your disbelief for the sake of the experience", that's actually called nonsense, false, untrue, incorrect, inaccurate, etc.

You can do whatever you want. You can say whatever you desire. You can think whatever is more convenient to you. Nothing will erase that act. You may not like it, but you do have to live with it. AC is dead.

For all those true AC fans out there, if you want to know what really happens in this game, you're better off reading the book.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40p33q2u8AU

I have to agree here, the Animus was never designed to interact and change the past but to relive it all the things you do in a memory is still in character AKA your ancestor but it didn't change story outcomes because you are RELIVING a memory you are simple halting the progress of the story if you just jump around before the next cutscene begings I swear the only reason why people buy this nonsense of dialoge choices is either Time travel or they are so sick of how Ubisoft gandles the lore that we just escept everything thrown at us, if they did this with AC4 people will be either furious or just confussed but because almost no one knows the identity anymore they just buy it.

MnemonicSyntax
06-23-2018, 06:10 PM
How irrational is it, to be "viewing" memories of passed events, and still be able to choose character gender, have dialogue options and lead to multiple endings? Some people will always buy into anything, just for that symbol on the cover.About as irrational as you continuing this tirade to try to make people change their minds, while continuing to repeat the same diatribe over and over again. We get it, you don't care for Odyssey.

All this "true fan" talk is total crap. A "true fan" would continue to stick with the franchise through thick and thin, no matter what. Other "true fans" have tried to explain that even since AC1 that the Animus has been nothing but a possible approximation. You guys continue to throw around hardcore science and fact with the basis that your DNA actually carries the memories of your ancestors and those memories are passed on. That's the root of the story line but also pure science fiction. Anything beyond explain the specifics of how it works is also science fiction, including what memories we can and cannot see.

Megas_Doux
06-23-2018, 06:12 PM
Well....

This game speaks cash grab through and through. I mean, Ubi had a record fiscal year thanks from Origins and FC5 being huge successes. I felt as if the higher ups thought "man, having an origins story in the late first century BCE really deprive us from using some really possible sequels, so let's take a piss on the lore let's have a game BEFORE the one we JUST released".

I'm not remotely excited about this game which I find truly odd because it looks like if two out of my three favorite games in the franchise (Origins and AC IV) had a gameplay baby in a setting that I have ALWAYS loved. Don't get me wrong, the graphics and environments look astonishing, I'm sure the world will be breathtaking and the gameplay will be fun...

Yet, the fact Unity's team is releasing this game with such a rush and the aforamentioned utter disregard from the lore is preventing me from being interested at all.





You can do whatever you want. You can say whatever you desire. You can think whatever is more convenient to you. Nothing will erase that act. You may not like it, but you do have to live with it. AC is dead.



Money talks!!!

See if this game happens to bomb both critically (like Unity) and/or financially (like Syndicate) I can see Ubi back tracking from its most controversial elements. I loved Origins despite it shortcomings for I genuinely enjoyed its combat, skill tree or general design while still feeling like an AC game after all, unlike Odyssey, but that's me.

ProdiGurl
06-23-2018, 06:42 PM
I have to agree here, the Animus was never designed to interact and change the past but to relive it all the things you do in a memory is still in character AKA your ancestor but it didn't change story outcomes because you are RELIVING a memory you are simple halting the progress of the story if you just jump around before the next cutscene begings I swear the only reason why people buy this nonsense of dialoge choices is either Time travel or they are so sick of how Ubisoft gandles the lore that we just escept everything thrown at us, if they did this with AC4 people will be either furious or just confussed but because almost no one knows the identity anymore they just buy it.
I keep reminding early AC fans that after they stopped desynching missions that you failed to accomplish EXACTLY how the Assassin completed the mission, you've already been screwing with "reliving the memory"....
Every game we got to play missions the way we wanted to play them - differently from each other -, the game concept of AC has been corrupted but that was ok with you.
All Odyssey is doing is forcing the "real" fans to acknowledge that they've already been compromising Lore. It's only a matter of degree. If the degree of direction is just too far to continue with, fine. Just leave the series.

This is a GAME - and since all the AC Lore & Animus are fake/untrue/not real/sci fi, I'm pretty sure that Devs can find a way to work it all in to make sense. Even if they didn't, they're still trying to expand the series for Longevity imo.
Unless you go back to strict desynching of missions you fail to complete ONE WAY (with all of us playing the same assassin's past), the game core is being perverted. We can't possibly be true to reliving memories while all of us play missions completely different.
"Real purists" should demand it go back to AC1-ACB or dump the series entirely to remain "true to the AC brand.

quanzaizai
06-23-2018, 11:29 PM
If people want the game to fit "player's lore". The game will get an insta dead lol. That kind of gameplay is outdated and gamers now all prefer multiple ending. About the lore, I feel like somehow this is what the franchise meant to go for from the start. Old animus then now new animus everything has to change and evolve my dear assassins. Before we were just looking at the past, now we need to interact with it. Some people just completely forgot it is a new animus now, not the one from AC1 anymore.

HDinHB
06-24-2018, 02:18 AM
Some people will always buy into anything, just for that symbol on the cover.

To be fair, I don't think the Assassins' symbol has appeared on the standard cover since the Black Flag on AC4, at least not prominently. And Odyssey doesn't even use the symbol, just the capital lambda.


All this "true fan" talk is total crap. A "true fan" would continue to stick with the franchise through thick and thin, no matter what.

That's only true if you are using "fan" in the original sense of fanatic. A "true fan" can still point out when their team makes a stupid decision, can be disappointed in a bad season, or heartbroken when an easy victory is thrown away. And don't even think about what happens when a "true fan's" team moves out of town.

Your first thought was more correct...the "no true fan" fallacy is a fallacy regardless of which side of the argument tries to use it.

So, if a long-time fan (admirer, buff, supporter, aficionado) thinks the series is taking a wrong turn and want to complain, cajole, vent, or rant, this forum is the perfect place to do it.

MnemonicSyntax
06-24-2018, 04:12 AM
Your first thought was more correct...the "no true fan" fallacy is a fallacy regardless of which side of the argument tries to use it.

Which pretty much is my only point.

I'm using it in it's original sense in what a true fan means, not the pretentious "we're not getting our way so we're speaking for everyone" definition.


So, if a long-time fan (admirer, buff, supporter, aficionado) thinks the series is taking a wrong turn and want to complain, cajole, vent, or rant, this forum is the perfect place to do it.

And that's fine. I never said they couldn't. What I said was I'm sick of the high and mighty "true fan" crap.

Express tour frustrations. Don't speak for.the fandom, don't put yourself on some sort of.pedestal. Pretty simple stuff really.

Marios_Gate7
06-24-2018, 12:15 PM
Hello and first of all thank you for releasing a title set in ancient Greece.. As i come from Greece im honoured for this and all greeks im sure will support this game 100% .. But i noticed some things that didnt like.The athenians hopefully appear historical accurate but why spartans look like gladiators with no shields and no corinthian helmets??? If you could please fix that and also the 2 armies of athens and sparta fight with hoplite phalanx as a single unit and not 1v1 fights,but our character can fight as he wants it would be more realistic and the game will be even more worth.. Im not talking about the main characters, just the soldiers that appear ingame could be more historical accurate if the spartans had shields and corinthian helmets like the athenians cause they look really fake.. If you need any help with the models you can check Rome II Total War and copy some spartan units from there or feel free to contact me and i will gladly help you providing you with historical info and pictures on how spartans really looked like that period. Please fix the spartans they look like the movie 300 its a shame .. I hope you listen me and take my advise... Im still surprised about the title and all Greeks but if you fix that tiny problem this game will be the best Assassins Creed title,just dont be lazy and make this game worth the money and believe me you wont regret it if you change it. All greeks from age 9-35 will buy this game for sure..Also i would like to mention some other things i noticed. The map is perfect but you cut a bit from Epirus and put sea instead of land i dont understand the reason.. Another thing is that in the Peloponnesian war many greek city states took part not only athens and sparta. Spartas biggest ally was korinthos and they also controlled all the region of Peloponnese including Argos and athens biggest ally was korkyra but half of greek city states were allies of spartans and other half allies of athenians. You could include some of these city states as factions but most important and first priority should be to fix the unit models of spartans cause they appear like gladiators with no shields or naked from the movie 300 is awful.. And a last thing is to fix the nature a bit. In the region of Laconia and in the island of Crete it is more wild nature,not many trees,just many mountains near the sea with rocks and in some places dark-red rocks and instead of the random plants that appear you should include more olive trees that produce oil .Laconia and Crete have the best oil in greece and all over the world. At last why you release 5 different expensive versions and not 2 or 3? 1 with full game 2 with full game and dlcs and 3 full game dlcs and extra the figures.. its so simple. most people think negative about this game but i still hope in fixes. If you listen to me you wont regret it i promish. I live in Piraeus port in Athens and i come from a village near Gytheion the port of Sparta. Im a big fan of historical accurate games and this game can reach that and become like AC:1 that took place in the holy lands and holy wars with historical characters etc.. It will attract even more people that didnt even play a single AC title. Thanks for your attention i hope you saw my case and answer me soon that you will consider my thoughts .. Thanks again for releasing such a game im grateful and honoured 😄

ModernWaffle
06-24-2018, 01:06 PM
Well....

This game speaks cash grab through and through. I mean, Ubi had a record fiscal year thanks from Origins and FC5 being huge successes. I felt as if the higher ups thought "man, having an origins story in the late first century BCE really deprive us from using some really possible sequels, so let's take a piss on the lore let's have a game BEFORE the one we JUST released".

...Money talks!!!

See if this game happens to bomb both critically (like Unity) and/or financially (like Syndicate) I can see Ubi back tracking from its most controversial elements. I loved Origins despite it shortcomings for I genuinely enjoyed its combat, skill tree or general design while still feeling like an AC game after all, unlike Odyssey, but that's me.

This point about using profits solely as an indication for progress is a really important concern that I'm surprised that some people are overlooking. They took a year break because profits and reception fell for AC and that became an indicator that the series was doing something fundamentally wrong. This is not something that you can just fix in one game (Origins) and I thought they appreciated that. But apparently all it takes in one good fiscal year and they're now confident that the franchise has no underlying problems that will come to bite them back later.

Origins was a product that you could tell was created with caution. It took a massive note to fan feedback and it delved into new genres properly (like RPG mechanics) without having them overtaking the game's premise. It's an example of evolution that's not rushed. Odyssey is introducing new things that could be great in the long run, but they're messing up their chances by being forced to implement them too quickly.

So sure Odyssey has some interesting new elements, but I can't help but look at it and think that all its potential is downplayed due to a very toxic mentality of corporate arrogance. I mean when they said naval combat was returning I was so excited but in terms of the footage they've shown so far it's a downgrade from BF, which is embarrassing since Odyssey is four games ahead of it. What an absolute shame to re-introduce such a popular mechanic in such a mundane way. In that light, would I really want to pay retail price for a game that isn't fully invested in itself in comparison to other franchises that truly have their heart and soul poured into them by their publishers and developers?

joelsantos24
06-24-2018, 01:19 PM
About as irrational as you continuing this tirade to try to make people change their minds, while continuing to repeat the same diatribe over and over again. We get it, you don't care for Odyssey.
Dude, I'm not trying to change the minds of anyone. Saying so and throwing some pseudo-expensive words whilst claiming it, won't make true. Moreover, stating that I've been "abusively denunciating" something, is beyond overreaching, not to mention slightly ludicrous and insulting. I'm just conveying my views, to whom those may be relevant or interesting. If you don't like the points of those who don't like this game or development path, then that's your problem, your responsibility, not ours. Your only "agenda" here, has been to unilaterally dismiss every single person that either dislikes this game or actually disagrees with you.

As for the "pedestal" reference, using your own words to address it: "it's total crap". The only one here who (pretentiously) seems to assume that he's on some kind of high pedestal of moral superiority, is you. Don't ever quote or address me again. We're done. Have a nice day.


Well....

This game speaks cash grab through and through. I mean, Ubi had a record fiscal year thanks from Origins and FC5 being huge successes. I felt as if the higher ups thought "man, having an origins story in the late first century BCE really deprive us from using some really possible sequels, so let's take a piss on the lore let's have a game BEFORE the one we JUST released".

I'm not remotely excited about this game which I find truly odd because it looks like if two out of my three favorite games in the franchise (Origins and AC IV) had a gameplay baby in a setting that I have ALWAYS loved. Don't get me wrong, the graphics and environments look astonishing, I'm sure the world will be breathtaking and the gameplay will be fun...

Yet, the fact Unity's team is releasing this game with such a rush and the aforamentioned utter disregard from the lore is preventing me from being interested at all.
Exactly. The "cash grab" reference, does comprehensively describe Ubisoft's current business model. Look at all their games, with a few slight theme or perspective distinctions, they're all fundamentally "copy-pasted" from one another. AC, GR, FC, etc. Between us (SC fans), we're actually scared of seeing a sequel to Blacklist, since it might turn out to be an open world game, God forbid.


Money talks!!!

See if this game happens to bomb both critically (like Unity) and/or financially (like Syndicate) I can see Ubi back tracking from its most controversial elements. I loved Origins despite it shortcomings for I genuinely enjoyed its combat, skill tree or general design while still feeling like an AC game after all, unlike Odyssey, but that's me.
Yes, money does talk. The single, most significant reason behind their games being all "copy-pasted", is Ubisoft's desire to induce the fans to play all of their games, or at least most of them, without feeling to much out of depth or context. If the fundamental characteristics of the games, are prominently similar, then an AC fan will be very much likely to buy and play GR, for example.


To be fair, I don't think the Assassins' symbol has appeared on the standard cover since the Black Flag on AC4, at least not prominently. And Odyssey doesn't even use the symbol, just the capital lambda.
It was a metaphor. It was meant to be a generalistic comment, therefore, not specifically connected to AC.


That's only true if you are using "fan" in the original sense of fanatic. A "true fan" can still point out when their team makes a stupid decision, can be disappointed in a bad season, or heartbroken when an easy victory is thrown away. And don't even think about what happens when a "true fan's" team moves out of town.

Your first thought was more correct...the "no true fan" fallacy is a fallacy regardless of which side of the argument tries to use it.

So, if a long-time fan (admirer, buff, supporter, aficionado) thinks the series is taking a wrong turn and want to complain, cajole, vent, or rant, this forum is the perfect place to do it.
Yes, contrary to the apparent beliefs and "agendas" of some around here, this is, indeed, the ideal context to forward our concerns about the games. Yet, some people just don't like to read about those, though.

DragonHuang97
06-24-2018, 01:43 PM
Sorry for making it a bit confusing. I get your point of gameplay and to some extent I do agree with it cuz I was also a bit annoyed by some of the constraints in earlier AC games such as time limits and "Avoid being detected". But what actually matters most for me is whether these constraints make sense, and in earlier games they do because their explanation is that we are replaying the memories of ancestors and since they finished the job within a specific time and they didn't get caught in the mission, we are supposed to do they same. However level setting is not making any sense because enemies are human and human can't survive a hundred cuts on the throat or dozens of arrows through the head.:D

DragonHuang97
06-24-2018, 01:49 PM
Opps I tried to reply you but somehow it became an individual post..

rob.davies2014
06-24-2018, 02:02 PM
In my opinion, it was a bad idea for Ubisoft to set the formation of the Assassin Brotherhood so late in history in the 1st century BC because then you're cutting out A LOT of other time periods in which they could explore the Assassin-Templar conflict. All the previous Assassins before that point have now become "proto-Assassins", people whose actions embodied the ideals of the Assassins but weren't part of an Assassin Order. I don't think people are going to be as interested in exploring a time period before the formation of the central conflict of the series. They can talk about the conflicting ideals of 'freedom' and 'order' existing before then but that's obvious and that generic conflict basically describes SO MANY other video games, films, stories etc.

The idea of these two secret organisations having always existed and pulling the strings of history is very enticing and in my opinion, Ubisoft should have stuck with what I thought was the original canon; that Adam and Eve were the first Assassins because they fought for freedom against the First Civilization and then Cain was the first Templar who killed his brother to steal the Apple of Eden. (Side note: I'd love to find out more about this rebellion, maybe in a video game or through some other medium, like with a Westworld-style hosts breaking free and rescuing each other and fighting back against the Isu, and then maybe to restore the lost order, the son of the two main revolutionaries takes the Apple to try and control the newly-freed chaotic population of humans). And then we could have had these two groups fighting each other throughout history from the point of the Isu era to the present day.

The other major issue with the series in my opinion is the removal of social stealth. It was one of the three core tenants of the Assassin's Creed and then in the origins game for the Assassins, there is no social stealth. I felt this was one of the things that really made the game stand out from others. I know it wasn't great beforehand, but they needed to invest time and effort into improving it, not abandon it altogether. I hope whichever game comes after Odyssey reintroduces social stealth into the series.

The changes they've made to Odyssey I just feel a bit 'meh' about. I don't play Assassin's Creed for RPG elements, or combat, or for being a well-known mercenary. I want a game where I have to use stealth (environmental but mainly social), conduct public assassinations, explore the historical conflict between the Assassins and Templars, and have an actual modern day story that is rich and interesting, not the Initiate/floating iPad waffle they've had since Black Flag.

joelsantos24
06-24-2018, 02:32 PM
In my opinion, it was a bad idea for Ubisoft to set the formation of the Assassin Brotherhood so late in history in the 1st century BC because then you're cutting out A LOT of other time periods in which they could explore the Assassin-Templar conflict. All the previous Assassins before that point have now become "proto-Assassins", people whose actions embodied the ideals of the Assassins but weren't part of an Assassin Order. I don't think people are going to be as interested in exploring a time period before the formation of the central conflict of the series. They can talk about the conflicting ideals of 'freedom' and 'order' existing before then but that's obvious and that generic conflict basically describes SO MANY other video games, films, stories etc.
I think that the connection between the beginning of this conflict in full force, and Ancient Egypt, made some sense. In many ways, the Ancient Egyptian society was probably the most significant and important in human history. It's symbolism, mythological undercurrent and historical length, sort of highlights and differentiates this society from all others. More than once, we heard the reference "the one's who knew the gods" in Origins, so the more than probable link towards the First Civilisation kind of explains the genesis of the conflict in that context.

But I agree with you, portraying the establishment of the Hidden Ones in the Origins time context, really underwhelms the exploration of previous time windows. However, if they want to display the foundation of the Order of the Ancients, by Pharaoh Smenkhkare, in 1334 BC, that may be relevant and interesting. That being said, I don't think Odyssey will address that fact, since the game takes place about 900 years after those events.


The changes they've made to Odyssey I just feel a bit 'meh' about. I don't play Assassin's Creed for RPG elements, or combat, or for being a well-known mercenary. I want a game where I have to use stealth (environmental but mainly social), conduct public assassinations, explore the historical conflict between the Assassins and Templars, and have an actual modern day story that is rich and interesting, not the Initiate/floating iPad waffle they've had since Black Flag.
Yeah, that's my exact feeling with Odyssey, I'm just not interested in what it portrays. Clearly, the series no longer aims at highlighting the elements that defined it up until now, so my lack of interest is somewhat expected.

Megas_Doux
06-24-2018, 03:38 PM
In my opinion, it was a bad idea for Ubisoft to set the formation of the Assassin Brotherhood so late in history in the 1st century BC because then you're cutting out A LOT of other time periods in which they could explore the Assassin-Templar conflict. All the previous Assassins before that point have now become "proto-Assassins", people whose actions embodied the ideals of the Assassins but weren't part of an Assassin Order. I don't think people are going to be as interested in exploring a time period before the formation of the central conflict of the series. They can talk about the conflicting ideals of 'freedom' and 'order' existing before then but that's obvious and that generic conflict basically describes SO MANY other video games, films, stories etc.

.

I do agree!!!!!

I loved AC Origins and from the historical standpoint I genuinely enjoyed and still enjoy going from Ancient Egyptian Ruins/places to Roman settlements/forts and the contemporary whole Ptolemaic syncretism going on at the time helped creating a truly diverse and immersive world. I mean, from the vast deserts filled with Egyptian stuff to the roman packed mountains, wow.....

However, if still in Egypt and not let's say Mesopotamia, I would've set this game in the New Kingdom during the XIV - XIII centuries BCE as the true modern, organized birth -we were always told there were "templars and "asassins" in one way or another- of both factions. To me it was the perfect time because they would've been able to use other setting ancient greece or Babylon while still respecting this origins story while still allowing enough historic stuff to built your AC gameplay, unlike the Old kingdom in which there's pretty much "nothing" other than






Exactly. The "cash grab" reference, does comprehensively describe Ubisoft's current business model. Look at all their games, with a few slight theme or perspective distinctions, they're all fundamentally "copy-pasted" from one another. AC, GR, FC, etc. Between us (SC fans), we're actually scared of seeing a sequel to Blacklist, since it might turn out to be an open world game, God forbid.


Yes, money does talk. The single, most significant reason behind their games being all "copy-pasted", is Ubisoft's desire to induce the fans to play all of their games, or at least most of them, without feeling to much out of depth or context. If the fundamental characteristics of the games, are prominently similar, then an AC fan will be very much likely to buy and play GR, for example.


.

I agree with you, but partially. My main problem other than the whole choose your character narrative is not the gameplay, but the fact they are kind disrespecting the lore under the excuse of the whole "proto assassin thing" thing even more so than in Origins and also the matter the team which released the most broken title in the franchise to date is behind this sequel.......

And well, should this game fails to meet their expectations I'm sure that some of its controversial elements will be gone for the next generation of games.

Edit: The naval thing kinda baffles me, but at least has taken a back seat, at least that's what I have read in the AMA thread.

joelsantos24
06-24-2018, 03:55 PM
I agree with you, but partially. My main problem other than the whole choose your character narrative is not the gameplay, but the fact they are kind disrespecting the lore under the excuse of the whole "proto assassin thing" thing even more so than in Origins and also the matter the team which released the most broken title in the franchise to date is behind this sequel.......

And well, should this game fails to meet their expectations I'm sure that some of its controversial elements will be gone for the next generation of games.

Edit: The naval thing kinda baffles me, but at least has taken a back seat, at least that's what I have read in the AMA thread.
Yes, the nonsensical approach they're taking towards the mythology, is also my main concern and most highlighting point of discord. It's a matter of fact that most of their games are "copy-pasted". but that's beyond the point, here. We're obviously talking about the mythology and the fact that they're much more interested in appealing to new audiences with the more classical RPG elements, rather than just respecting the mythology and it's natural limitations.

AnimusLover
06-24-2018, 04:15 PM
I didnīt misunderstand anything here, If anything you Misunderstand me. All i did here was to correct you on how and where the AC series declined, and it's at the moment, where Patrice made AC Brotherhood and later got fired.

Yes, but I was referring to when the effects of his firing actually became visible in the lore and that was in Black Flag where they stopped moving things forward and just started adding random nonsense like the Sage.


Oh and quality does define a AC game, a AC has to have a certian amount of Qualities and overall richness of the plot in order to be considered amazing or even good and guess what, i was reffering to the Plotīs quality, not the gameplay like you seem to believe.

I never said quality doesn't define an AC game... Quality deifnes ANY game obviously. However, I was referring purely to the quality of the LORE only.


To Black flag: No it was a Assassins game, it was the story of how an dirty Pirate became a proud member of the Assassins Brotherhood after learning that his way wasnīt the best and so, he wanted to join a cause not this time out of Selfishness like his Pirate Career that cost him nearly everything.

No, it wasn't. It was a pirate game with the Assassin's Creed logo on it. You see, this right here is the reason why Ubisoft are cheeky enough to make a game like Odyssey and call it 'Assassin's Creed' - fans are easily fooled by similar mechanics and any hint of lore (which is why they are pushing First Civ so heavily in interviews so people know "IT'S STILL AN ASSASSIN'S CREED GAME, GUYS!") Edward did not become an Assassin until after the game finished, we never actually got to play as an Assassin in that game, only as a pirate. We get one cut scene at the end where he says he's joining the Assassins and one cut scene of him as an older man with kids being rude to someone and that's it. The same trick Ashraf pulled with Origins. The man has no interest in making an Assassin's Creed game, he clearly doesn't like Assassin's Creed. It was a pirate game set in an Assassin's Creed universe, with the Assassins/ Templar conflict being used as a mere BACKDROP when that used to be the entire point of the series. Sad. They keep making entire games which take place before the protagonist actually becomes an Assassin so that newbies aren't bogged down by the series long history with lore as to not overwhelm them, whilst ignoring the hardcore fans who actually want to see the plot move FORWARD. Fans like you have accepted this and that's why we're getting a game like Odyssey which not only takes places before the Brotherhood even existed but has dialogue options and no hidden blade.


Itīs a lot like Altairīs change of heart after realizing that he had been in the wrong for a long time and turned into the best Assassin the world had ever seen. Itīs to tell a story how an average Pirate, became a Assassin and a ok one, after all he gave us the idea that maybe the Creed isnīt the end, but the Beginning of Wisdom, so no, itīs diespite your flawed Claims that itīs no true Scotsman.

LOL it's nothing like Altair. To compare Edward's arc to Altair's is laughable. Altair was an Assassin from BIRTH, a Master Assassin that was stripped of his title due to becoming too full of himself. The entire story and character arc is about him questioning his creed and what it means to be an Assassin which culminated in him finding his path to redemption. This is reflected in the memory corridors the most - back when they weren't just an excuse to do pretentious theatrics like in Origins. Even in gameplay terms, the entire point is about a fallen Assassin working his way through the ranks to his former glory which is why weapons and health increases as you go along to reflect Altair's rise. The Creed is so present in the protaognist's character arc in AC1 that it's deeply embedded in the gameplay, itself. That is where it differs to Black Flag. Edward is a pirate so every activity he does is about plundering, looting and shaggging his way to fame. This is reflected in the gameplay and any upgrades he gets, such as to the jackdaw is to enable him to carry out these activities. There are literally activities where he as to chase sea shanties so his crew can sing as he's plundering and looting and actitivites where he needs to chase women to bed them. This makes sense for his character because he is a pirate so these are his main concerns but it has nothing to do with being an Assassin. The whole redemption thing is a tack-on at the end. It is not about an Assassin because Edward was not an Assassin in Black Flag and when he does become an Assassin i.e. after you put the controller down he gets taken out by some random mercenary. lol yeah, some "Assassin" he was. Even Evie mocks him in her journals.


Actually it is the Origin story of the Assassins as we now it from the first game( The fingercut ritual,The feathers, Leap of faith e.t.c) not the first Assassins per se, that would be Adam and Eve. itīs like with Pizza, Pizza was initially flat breat with toppings on it, until a Italian man made the famous Pizza Margahrita, creating the "first Pizza".

Um, no. What you got is little winks and nods to the lore in order to trick everyone into thinking it was an Assassin's Creed game but it had no depth, no build up and no payoff. It was all just buzz words and shallow references. The way Origins should have been written is that the entire game should have been Bayek trying to form the Brotherhood, not a generic, poorly told revenge story with something barely resembling the Brotherhood as we know it today being formed at the very end which didn't even make any sense. Origins has the second worst story after Unity.


Thatīs the same principle with Orgins, he wasnīt the first Assassin in the long line of Assasssins, just the one that formed the ideas we know from AC 1, but of course the end product wasnīt satisfying at all, like whatīs the point in cutting the finger of a person, if you can just built the same Hidden blade Bayek uses, right? It was as you descriped it, a Ultimate failrue to tell a good Origin story, becasue the Devs didnīt knew, how to make a Character interesting without being relevant to the plot. Normally, the Character a viewer has to be inwested too is the one, who is the most important and the most revelant to the whole thing, itīs there to make the Main Protagonist stand out from the crowd like Altair and Ezio, who are remembered as the Greatest Protagonists of Assassins Creed, because of thier vital part of the plot. No one is going to care about a main hero that didnīt do anything important to the plot like Arno and/or wasnīt important enough like the Frye twins. People only care about a Character that is important, the last Assassins before Bayek( not counting AC1-4) pretty much lacked any important feats or achievements to make them likable. Thatīs how Bayek ended up being a fan favorite, everyone asked for a sequel with him, but all of it was thrawed because his story had one key problem: It was set in a period, where Greece was no longer interesting and got Bayek was probably made Founder of the Assassins, but they executed it the wrong way by discrediting Eve and other Characters. However that alone isnīt enough to make a Character Good and you can mess ip still, if you arenīt clear enough like origins.

English is clearly not your first language because this entire paragraph doesn't make any sense, sorry.


Also Ashraf didnīt write the story, it was Alain Mercieca, blame him.

He's the creative director so he works closely with the narrative team so yes, he is to blame.


sigh..Man, IF a Trailer or adversiting of any kind makes a Character look less important or doesn't show enough of her/him,exspecially a Main Character, then itīs a juristical testament that they this Character wasnīt the one they are the most found off or rather the one they had in Mind.
She didnīt even talked in the trailer or made any long appearences, and she is our potential main Heroine! That alone proves my point that they didnīt cared so much for her. We have seen more stuff from Alexios alone, in both leaks, Trailers, pictures and even Gameplay footage that DIDN`T EVEN ADVERTISED KASSANDRA ALONE, and most of them showed us Alexious in the beginning anyway and it the case you didnīt noticed, THEY ARE BOTH SELECTABLE CHARACTERS, OF COURSE WE WILL GET TO PLAY BOTH We have the option to choose between both Characters. What a single Youtuber thinks alone isnīt important( there is Polygon after all).

Nope, you're wrong. The creative director confirmed Kassandra is the canon character (https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1897692-Reddit-AMA-with-ACOD-Creative-Director-Jonathan-Dumont-6-21-2018) so you misunderstand once again. It was obvious to anyone who played the E3 demo - which featured Kassandra talking and all the various choices she could select - who the true lead was but if that's not enough for you then the words of Ubisoft themselves will have to do lol. Alexios didn't get any lines at all and all the pictures you saw of him were from LEAKS, not official stills that Ubisoft put out themselves - what are you talking about? The only reason why Kassandra wasn't in the trailer was to appease boneheads that don't want to play as a woman but the actual demo featured Kassandra because her animations were better and had received more love because that is the character they are most proud of and care for the most. She is the canon character. It's been confirmed. You are wrong again.



Once again, I undestand the things you said perfectly, I just corrected you on things you didnīt knew off and decided to make it look like as if i wasnīt who get it, when you didnīt get what i was trying to say, like the way that you accused me of talking of the Quality of a game, instead of the plot. If you want to respond to me, donīt make assumptions about me.

You clearly don't get it but whatever.

MnemonicSyntax
06-24-2018, 07:18 PM
Dude, I'm not trying to change the minds of anyone. Saying so and throwing some pseudo-expensive words whilst claiming it, won't make true. Moreover, stating that I've been "abusively denunciating" something, is beyond overreaching, not to mention slightly ludicrous and insulting. I'm just conveying my views, to whom those may be relevant or interesting. If you don't like the points of those who don't like this game or development path, then that's your problem, your responsibility, not ours. Your only "agenda" here, has been to unilaterally dismiss every single person that either dislikes this game or actually disagrees with you.

As for the "pedestal" reference, using your own words to address it: "it's total crap". The only one here who (pretentiously) seems to assume that he's on some kind of high pedestal of moral superiority, is you. Don't ever quote or address me again. We're done. Have a nice day.


Ah yes, the "insert finger into ears and blah blah blah I can't hear you response."

I have never once dismissed anyone's opinions on here, except when people such as yourself pull that "true fan" crap. You can say what you like and I may disagree, but "true fan" is such a loaded term that the definition works for anyone.

I consider myself a "true fan" and I'm frustrated with the way games are going. But I'm sitting here on the forums going "what true fans really want is..." Or "true fans aren't going to buy this game" with some ridiculous nonsense like that because the statement itself is vehemently untrue.

That's my ONLY point. Do you get it now? A lot of your frustrations I actually share. Having someone talk about them is perfectly fine, regardless of how negative they are. It's when people somehow feel the need to put their opinion over the opinion of others is where I have the problem.

End of *that* discussion.

joelsantos24
06-24-2018, 08:24 PM
Yes, but I was referring to when the effects of his firing actually became visible in the lore and that was in Black Flag where they stopped moving things forward and just started adding random nonsense like the Sage.
I'm the first to praise Désilets for his work in creating the series. I'm a big fan of his.

That being said, he's also to blame for many flawed notions that plagued the series from the start. For example, how he focused solely on social stealth as the only stealth component in the series, disregarding physical stealth entirely. It was absolutely nonsensical, in a game that was founded merely on the ability to blend in amongst the crowds, to ask players to enter or infiltrate restricted areas, where there were no crowds to begin with, and so, where there were no opportunities for social stealth whatsoever. AC3 was the first instalment to introduce some elements of physical stealth, but it wasn't good. Black Flag was better in that regard, I believe.

As far as the stories and narrative are concerned, AC was never all that evolved. With Désilets leaving, it got even worse. Black Flag was, indeed, the turning point, as far as the mythology is regarded. I don't know if killing Desmond was in Désilets' original plan for the series, but that definitely turned it into a mythologically bankrupted context. Adding elements just for the sake of novelty and "keeping things fresh", doesn't make sense, by definition. I think that's the problem.

MageAquarius20
06-27-2018, 03:57 PM
I'm sure the Messenians would disagree with Sparta being considered a liberator.. their entire city-state had basically become a slave-state of Sparta to do their bidding, and were brutally surpressed whenever they tried to free themselves.

I`m also sure that Korinth and the many other City states would agree that Sparta was thier liberator. The Spartans fought in the war because Athens established a mini Empire and betrrayed thier allience with them. When we want to include slavery and oppression in this whole thing then i am afraid that Athens was way worse. They owned far more slave than the Spartans and were more dependant on them, they destoryed and subjegated way more people than the Spartans, they even took all the Money they got from the Gold mines that were supposed to be used to fight the Persians as funding for thier own Temples that were meant to show the Superioty of Attic Greeks to all other Greeks.


Also, was it that Spartan men were nicer to their women, or that Spartan women were every bit as tough and brutal as the men, thus earning their more equal place within Spartan society? I'd argue anyone who can leave their baby to die in the elements simply due to not displaying perceived desirable Spartan traits as an infant (i.e. too ''soft'') is probably a pretty intense and unforgiving personality.

Well at least it's better than what Athens had to offer. As a Woman, you were doomed to stay for the rest of your life indoors while the Males could feast, philosoph and talk to each other and if they were rich, could even vote, in contrast to the middle class and the Rich Woman. It's like i said, Athens was more of an Oligarchy than a Democracy, which i will return too for:


I get what you're saying, on how the Athenians had a dark side and controlled other areas by force..pretty much every empire is guilty of that. But in terms of popular opinion, Athens is the birthplace of democracy, philosophy, and thus, ''freedom''. Meanwhile, Sparta was a rigid, very strong military state built on war and order. Purely speculation of course, but to me, this game and the character(s) we'll be playing will represent the birthplace of the Order.

Most people believe that the Pyramids were built by Slaves and that Napoleon was short, but that isn't really true here, it's simialrly with Athens reputation here. It may have been the place where Philosophy as a field of study( Older cultures had similiar concept like Scholars and Priests) but Democracy is a bit of a stretch. Athenian Democracy was nothing like our own in the slightest, it was a rigid, slave owning, Oligarchic entity where the Middle and lower classes, the Woman and slaves had no power over anything here, all descitions were made by the few rich males that decided things, our system based elements of this form of goverment, but not to 100% and niether the Athenians nor we expouse such ideas first. The Phoenicians, one of the main influences for Classic Greece( like the alphabet), had an earllier form of constitutional democracy, since they were a Trade ecconomy and very famous mercants, they needed a system that would help them with foreign and intern trade to gain more money. Earlier Civs like the Sumer and Haratta had an more primitive form of Democracy where a council of Elders would bring the will of the people to thier Kings and would help them to make descitions that beniffited the people most. Freedom as a concept existed since the beginning, when Humans had only themselves to take care off, it didn't somehow start with the creation of a slave owning Ecconomy. What Athens however did created was a form of "Democracy" we based our system off, like how we based parts of it from the iroquios. The goal of my post is not to slander Athens or say that thier City was a worthless pile of **** that needs to be forgotten, my point is that in the Peleponnesian wars, they were no freedom fighters, but the oppressor and bringer of Order. Sparta on the other hand, as sick and abysmal as they are, fought for the freedom of the remaining Greek city states, but then ultimately fell for Corruption and was then defeated by the true lords and savious the Thebians.

Also, in the material we got, we only fought against Athenians and not as spartans here, so i don't think we fight on the side of Athens, i mean Socrates was pretty much against Athenian Democracy after all.

AnimusLover
06-27-2018, 05:58 PM
I'm the first to praise Désilets for his work in creating the series. I'm a big fan of his.

That being said, he's also to blame for many flawed notions that plagued the series from the start. For example, how he focused solely on social stealth as the only stealth component in the series, disregarding physical stealth entirely. It was absolutely nonsensical, in a game that was founded merely on the ability to blend in amongst the crowds, to ask players to enter or infiltrate restricted areas, where there were no crowds to begin with, and so, where there were no opportunities for social stealth whatsoever. AC3 was the first instalment to introduce some elements of physical stealth, but it wasn't good. Black Flag was better in that regard, I believe.

Whilst I agree with this paragraph, this is, once again, gameplay. I am talking purely about lore.


As far as the stories and narrative are concerned, AC was never all that evolved. With Désilets leaving, it got even worse. Black Flag was, indeed, the turning point, as far as the mythology is regarded. I don't know if killing Desmond was in Désilets' original plan for the series, but that definitely turned it into a mythologically bankrupted context. Adding elements just for the sake of novelty and "keeping things fresh", doesn't make sense, by definition. I think that's the problem.

The historical narratives? No, sorry. AC1 has a fantastic story as does ACII. In fact, the reason why people love the Ezio trilogy so much is because of the characters and story, that's what went on to define the series before it misguidedly became about playing in a historical theme park.

As for the modern day, did it have problems? Sure. As a dev, you're always going to run into issues when your main game is about playing as an action hero in an exotic historical setting. Thus, time and resources has to go there instead but at least when Patrice was there they were actually trying, enough to get people like me interested anyway. I hated modern day at first but was sold on it round about Brotherhood when it started picking up. I feel like the devs abandoned it just as it was getting good (putting it on hold with Revelations and then literally killing it at the end of ACIII) and now...nothing. I very highly doubt Patrice wanted Desmond to die especially because they seemed to be killing off the lore just as he was on his way out.

r0nan2661
06-27-2018, 06:55 PM
I'm an OG Gamer. Arcade table Pong and Atari 2600 old. I have played every AC game with the exception of the smaller spinoffs for hand held. AC was and should always be a stealth first game. Taking that option away means you also must remove it from the AC catalog. It's NOT an AC game.
Also in Origins forcing feeding the Sea battles upon the player in order to progress just confirms that you know it's a garbage mini game. Give the out option and let the player progress and tackle that like the other missions. And how difficult is it to add a Sea Battle control schematic in the menu so the player doesn't go into battle blind? That's amateur game design and you know it. I realize time is money and you have deadlines, but I expect Ubisoft to produce quality games. Don't lower the bar for short term profit in lieu of losing long time customers.
AC must ALWAYS have a stealth option. Remember your creed:
"We work in the dark to serve the light."

ChewiePool
06-27-2018, 07:44 PM
Sorry to say but this game isn't AC. It only bears the title of AC to promote the game. It's totally rpg focused, no stealth, no creed because it plays way before origins. It just a greek spartan war game where you get to be the awesome hero with some vague AC elements.

Been a long time fan up until Origins, but I will pass this one. Dunno where you minds were at when developing this game.

Anyone else would like to share their opinion, excitement or disappointment?
If the game didn't have anything to do with the Pieces of Eden, then I would completely agree. But the modern day storyline of this game is said to be 'crucial.' And, the Spear of Leonidas is likely a piece of Eden. Even if the Greece part of the game itself isn't good, I'm buying it to see the next part of Laylas adventure, as well as to see whether my prediction that the Assassins will use the shroud from syndicate to bring Desmond Miles back from the dead will come true. Either way, if you're not gonna buy it, watch the parts of the playthroughs.

ChewiePool
06-27-2018, 07:48 PM
AC must ALWAYS have a stealth option. Remember your creed:
"We work in the dark to serve the light."
Yeah. It really pissed me off that Aya nor Bayek said that in Origins.

joelsantos24
06-27-2018, 09:26 PM
Whilst I agree with this paragraph, this is, once again, gameplay. I am talking purely about lore.
Nothing against that. My point was that, as much as I praise Désilets for his ideas and his talent, he didn't do everything right.


The historical narratives? No, sorry. AC1 has a fantastic story as does ACII. In fact, the reason why people love the Ezio trilogy so much is because of the characters and story, that's what went on to define the series before it misguidedly became about playing in a historical theme park.
Well, I love the stories from AC1 and AC2. With that being said, it's important to recognise that it's one thing to love the stories from the perspective of the fan, and it's another to claim those are flawless and perfect. The narrative was never Ubisoft's strength, and as much as I adore the stories from AC1 and AC2, many fans consider that those are riddled with "clichés" and very typical common grounds. The last great story that Ubisoft produced, was the "Prince of Persia: Sands of Time" series, whose first chapter, not coincidentally, was also produced by Désilets.


As for the modern day, did it have problems? Sure. As a dev, you're always going to run into issues when your main game is about playing as an action hero in an exotic historical setting. Thus, time and resources has to go there instead but at least when Patrice was there they were actually trying, enough to get people like me interested anyway. I hated modern day at first but was sold on it round about Brotherhood when it started picking up. I feel like the devs abandoned it just as it was getting good (putting it on hold with Revelations and then literally killing it at the end of ACIII) and now...nothing. I very highly doubt Patrice wanted Desmond to die especially because they seemed to be killing off the lore just as he was on his way out.
Again, not being it's strong feature, nor an aspect admittedly highlighted or that much revered by the company, the narrative drastically and naturally degraded (both the historical and the modern meta-story), after Désilets left the studios. He was probably one of Ubisoft's strongest promoters of the narrative branch.

Frag_Maniac
06-27-2018, 10:34 PM
1. Beautiful game world
2. Nice to have more naval battles
3. Disappointing forced combat style with magic spear and no shield
4. Dialog and outcome options that don't belong in what should be an action adventure game

Summary, wasted potential. Too many forced concepts that don't fit the AC theme. I'm not buying the hype that this will go down as best AC ever. If it sells best, it will in reality go down as the title that turned AC into RPG and bastardized the franchise in the process. I have to wonder if they consulted their advertising psychology experts and they determined that in pulling in a new RPG fanbase, they would have free reign to make up any crazy story and concepts without having to have any of it make sense. You have to admit, that fits Ubi's style lately to a T.

gordon677
06-28-2018, 11:07 AM
Looks great! I liked Origins, this seems to fit what I would like and what attracted me to Origins. Never really cared for AC games before I will pre order this one just like I did Origins. I for one am glad they're going RPG.

joelsantos24
06-28-2018, 11:19 AM
Looks great! I liked Origins, this seems to fit what I would like and what attracted me to Origins. Never really cared for AC games before I will pre order this one just like I did Origins. I for one am glad they're going RPG.
You'll feel right at home, then. Ubisoft is willing to purge their entire AC loyal fanbase, for the opportunity to bring in new audiences who have no connection, no knowledge, no relation, no love and no history with the series, whatsoever. It's not for AC fans, anymore, it's for RPG fans.

It's unbearably depressing, though, to see players who couldn't care less about the series, saying they're coming in just for the sheer mechanics. Thank God I'm a Playstation fan.

gordon677
06-28-2018, 11:44 AM
to be honest you're purging your self. They didn't force you to get out, you made that choice! It's a self exile, true that it's based on what they did to the game but you still chose that for your self! and thank god I like spaghetti.

joelsantos24
06-28-2018, 12:18 PM
to be honest you're purging your self. They didn't force you to get out, you made that choice! It's a self exile, true that it's based on what they did to the game but you still chose that for your self! and thank god I like spaghetti.
Be careful with that spaghetti, though, you mustn't overdo those carbs.

On the other hand, there are plenty of reasons to go overboard with Playstation. The best first-party catalogue in existence. A company that listens to it's fan-base and doesn't try to alienate any of it's communities. A fan-friendly business model that delivers the greatest single-player experiences, with the best narrative structures ever seen and the most absolutely overwhelming graphics.

Have fun with those empty mechanics and that pointless grind. In the meantime, we'll be playing The Last of Us 2, Ghost of Tsushima and Death Stranding. :cool:

ninja4hire10
06-28-2018, 01:02 PM
AC fandom has a lot in common with comic book fandom: "We're tired of the same ol' same ol', give us NEW!"

*Gives NEW*

"Boo! Hate NEW, give us OLD!"

Ah, AC "fandom" -- where folks love something so much they hate it.

joelsantos24
06-28-2018, 01:43 PM
I've said before and I'll say it again, there's only so much you can do to develop and improve something. Adding or including elements merely for the sake of novelty, is counterproductive, especially when those don't make much sense in the general context.

Ubisoft's sole purpose, it seems, is to attract these random, casual gamers, with absolutely no special interest, knowledge or connection with the series. No long-term AC fan is against change or evolution, per se, quite the opposite. The problem here, is that certain companies seem only capable or willing to move between extremes of the spectrum, with no balance or middle term. Change or development shouldn't be predicated on the ability to alienate or radicalise the community. The desire to captivate or appeal more to other, more casual audiences, shouldn't have to lead to the disaffection or estrangement of the community. That's all.

ChewiePool
06-28-2018, 08:50 PM
It is a hidden blade. It says so in AC2.
And Syndicate and Origins.