PDA

View Full Version : If 'Odyssey' was a marketed as new IP would you change your purchase?



ModernWaffle
06-13-2018, 11:39 AM
Would it persuade you not to buy it on release / at all or would it stop you from buying a special edition of the game etc?

Personally, it would convince me to go from wait for sale to buy on release. I like the game, but I think buying it on release at the moment would give Ubisoft motive to keep using the Assassin's Creed name as a label for these newer games. I appreciate that Odyssey may still have some AC elements, but I think at this point fans simply don't know what to expect in each new AC game because it has diversified in so many ways for better or worse.

Assume gameplay and story are essentially the same as what we've already seen so far but anything that is inherently an AC reference (e.g. terms like Piece of Eden, Leap of Faith, First Civilization) and the whole Layla MD plot are gone.

What are your thoughts? I'm interested to see what influence the AC brand has right now for existing or new fans.

cawatrooper9
06-13-2018, 02:26 PM
Personally, I'm excited for the potential it has to bring new ideas to the AC story.

But if it was a new IP based around Classical era Mediterranean sailing? You bet I'd still be very interested.

Kiroku
06-13-2018, 02:31 PM
Even if it was called somewhat like: Greece - A Spartan Story or some sht I would still give it a try when looking at the footage.

But gladly for me at least there are still tons of elements in the game that remind me of an AC game which makes it even better :)

ouwssama
06-13-2018, 02:43 PM
Of course I would give it a try as a new ip, But please stay away from AC and keep it as it was donít ruin it for godís sake

neruuk
06-13-2018, 03:12 PM
ACO was my first AC game. Tried the first one but after a few hours gave up. I am an RPG player at heart. Deviated and tried Ubisoft's ACO because EA gave up on making RPG's. For me, it is good news AC is implementing more RPG elements but I totally understand the old fans see there franchise mutate to something unrecognisable. Some fans will survive the change and others not.

I welcome the change because as a PC player and not digging the Indie RPG's I finally can play again and have something to look forward to. So, basically, I buy because it has become an RPG, revert back to the old syle and Ubisoft can keep it.

It will all come to sales figures but I doubt Ubi is going to make this a new IP and make old style AC again. I surmise it survives this format or it is mothballed altogether.

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 06:45 PM
But the modern day, PoEs, Isu, etc. are not references, they're the actual backbone of the series. They are the reason (story wise) why we have these games in the first place.

Regardless, I'd probably buy it still, because it plays like an AC game. Same with The Wind Road and that other Samurai game.

Alakazou
06-13-2018, 07:01 PM
Assume gameplay and story are essentially the same as what we've already seen so far but anything that is inherently an AC reference (e.g. terms like Piece of Eden, Leap of Faith, First Civilization) and the whole Layla MD plot are gone.

Everything that made AC, AC, is the part a care the less in the game. What I really like about AC, it's the historical part of it.

So it wouln't bother me at all ;)

ninja4hire10
06-13-2018, 07:17 PM
Would still keep it all the same. It'll be weird how the entirety of this new direction will gel with the already established lore, but I aim to find out. Even if this were a new IP and had absolutely zero to do with AC, though, I'd keep it. Like how even if Black Flag were a new IP (Skull & Bones doesn't count, IMHO) I'd still jump on board, because sailing those seas were incredible.

Ubi is responsible for three of my favorite gaming franchises: AC, Watch Dogs, and Splinter Cell. If Odyssey were it's own thing, I see no reason why they'd steer me wrong.

ModernWaffle
06-13-2018, 07:27 PM
But the modern day, PoEs, Isu, etc. are not references, they're the actual backbone of the series. They are the reason (story wise) why we have these games in the first place.

I am oversimplifying here so that I could ask the topic question and I appreciate that if they did drop the brand name it wouldn't be a particularly smooth change moving forward.

However, I do believe the surviving lore as of now will be forgotten in the coming installments because the statement they released previously about moving away from the narrative in the future is quite obvious from the transition of Origins to Odyssey (i.e. I'm predicting that there will eventually be a time when the lore exists just as loose references, so arguing from that standpoint)

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 07:28 PM
I certainly hope not. This seems like a step in the right direction to pick up the lore pieces, as it were.

OxIdOAC
06-13-2018, 07:37 PM
Yes. And waited for "black" edition and if the game is worth it, then i would buy it...

r0bb1e34
06-13-2018, 09:44 PM
Plus if they had marketed this game as anything but AC everyone would be giving it **** fo being a reskinned AC game.

MageAquarius20
06-13-2018, 09:49 PM
They could just reboot the franshise if they want to, it's not too late.

MnemonicSyntax
06-13-2018, 10:23 PM
They could just reboot the franshise if they want to, it's not too late.

It doesn't need rebooting.

TaleraRis
06-14-2018, 07:01 AM
I probably wouldn't buy a special edition for a new IP but I'd probably give it a whirl. They would have to take away all the trappings of AC, though - the Isu, the Pieces of Eden, the Animus, the Assassin/Templars and their feud, the Hidden Blade, free-running, etc. Basically just make it Ancient Greece Simulator and give it an interesting story hook.

Wombles-_-
06-14-2018, 08:15 AM
A Spartan mercenary, ship warfare nope would still part with my dosh. The only thing that would affect the purchase would be if it clashed with the release of Red Dead Redemption II.

Anykeyer
06-14-2018, 09:41 AM
I want AC to drop its assassins business (mostly modern day and animus bs) yet retain similar gameplay. So I wouldn't mind if they didnt call it AC.

DA SHIZZLE IG
06-14-2018, 01:48 PM
Like seriously, just looking at it's cover art, ubisofts presentation and watching game play. Would assasins creed be the first thing to cross your mind. Personally, I would think it was a new I.P using origins engine. My little cousin whoe's a casual AC player saw this game footage and diddn't even realize it was AC lol. Honestly I didn't either at first glance when I tuned into E3 late. I thought it was rise part 2 using ac origins engine. Then I thought that 300 finally got a video game.

On another note:
(Could one of you meme makers bring the xzibit pimp my ride meme back? I want it to say "Yo DAWG, I HEARD YOU LIKE PREQUELS. SO I TOOK YOUR PREQUEL AND GAVE IT A PREQUEL, A PRE-PREQUEL!")

ColdBloodedVet
06-14-2018, 02:22 PM
You probably wouldn't know it at first glance based on the slices of gameplay we received but once the protagonist used the eagle as a scout, I think it would click.

GhostAssassinLT
06-16-2018, 09:34 AM
I doubt it...
To me it seems like everything that I liked about the AC series has been removed from the game!

joelsantos24
06-16-2018, 09:59 AM
I doubt it...
To me it seems like everything that I liked about the AC series has been removed from the game!
Totally agreed.

No, I honestly wouldn't buy the renamed game. The same way I'll hardly buy this game as it stands. Full RPG's don't really interest me. I've already played TD and it was a disaster. If I can sell my Unity and Syndicate special editions, I'll probably try the rebooted Tomb Raider series, instead.

andro1806
06-16-2018, 12:48 PM
A new franchise for games like AC Odyssey will be interesting.

I mean standalone RPG games featuring different time periods. And if the games are not connected to each other like the far cry games, we don't have to worry about the choices we take in the game.

For example,a game can be featured in Japan during the ninja and samurai time period. We could play as a ninja or a samurai and take part in conquests.

Swailing
06-16-2018, 01:08 PM
And, as I've said before, use the setting to make an Assassin game to go with the time period.

I think Origins tried hard to recognise what had been lost about the original appeal of AC, and one of those things is the strong structure of chapters. In AC1, the loop was powerful and addictive: Al Mualim's conversations with you (and their subtle changes and hints), the quest for intel, your plan and execution, and escape. That's something I love in some stylistic movies. Kill List springs to mind; the screen goes to black between 'chapters' to announce the next target in stark white letters: "THE PRIEST", "THE ARCHIVIST", "THE POLITICIAN". That strong demarcation, when you're being led down an ever-darker path towards some kind of resolution, is a great dramatic measure, which gives you some hint of the ending's approach via your awareness of how far you've travelled.

But as much as Origins tried to give us The Heron, The Ibis, The Ram, The Crocodile and so on, we got them diluted in a 100h game with no urgency about any of them. So I'd love to see a game like Odyssey for the generalist warrior, maybe still from the Assassin clan but with a personality and goals to suit the RPG game, and then a second game which uses that world-building to deliver a tighter, sharper "true Assassin" game with a different story: something around 15-20h, with more detail-orientated construction, convoluted political shenanigans, more interiors, and more of a secret agent vibe. Maybe even first-person! Dishonored and Dishonored 2 really, really work as assassin games, and the engine is so impressive now that it could surely support 1st-person view without looking strange at all.

andro1806
06-16-2018, 01:13 PM
Just like how we play as a mercenary during the peloponnesian war in AC Odyssey, the games can be during a war except no templar or no isu or no assassins.

MnemonicSyntax
06-16-2018, 03:32 PM
And, as I've said before, use the setting to make an Assassin game to go with the time period.

I think Origins tried hard to recognise what had been lost about the original appeal of AC, and one of those things is the strong structure of chapters. In AC1, the loop was powerful and addictive: Al Mualim's conversations with you (and their subtle changes and hints), the quest for intel, your plan and execution, and escape. That's something I love in some stylistic movies. Kill List springs to mind; the screen goes to black between 'chapters' to announce the next target in stark white letters: "THE PRIEST", "THE ARCHIVIST", "THE POLITICIAN". That strong demarcation, when you're being led down an ever-darker path towards some kind of resolution, is a great dramatic measure, which gives you some hint of the ending's approach via your awareness of how far you've travelled.

But as much as Origins tried to give us The Heron, The Ibis, The Ram, The Crocodile and so on, we got them diluted in a 100h game with no urgency about any of them. So I'd love to see a game like Odyssey for the generalist warrior, maybe still from the Assassin clan but with a personality and goals to suit the RPG game, and then a second game which uses that world-building to deliver a tighter, sharper "true Assassin" game with a different story: something around 15-20h, with more detail-orientated construction, convoluted political shenanigans, more interiors, and more of a secret agent vibe. Maybe even first-person! Dishonored and Dishonored 2 really, really work as assassin games, and the engine is so impressive now that it could surely support 1st-person view without looking strange at all.

Your post, as usual, is well-thought out and constructive.

Just no first person please. Or make it optional. It makes me sick to play games like that :(

EzioLia2390
06-19-2018, 08:02 AM
They could just reboot the franshise if they want to, it's not too late.

Origins was their reboot. A good one at that. Ubisoft just messed it up by not giving us a proper sequel with bayek and further his story how he expanded the brotherhood.

To answer the thread. No people would not be as interested in this game if the name Assassins Creed wasn't on it. The thing is Ubisoft knows that. That's why they put the name on it despite the fact that it's not Assassins Creed. They already proved this with black flag. It was a fun game but not really an Assassins Creed game (more than Odyssey though) and what did Ubisoft do? People like pirates let's make Skull and Bones. The same thing will happen here. They will have a new IP focused on massive wars like this time period. Ubisoft stop testing ideas on the AC franchise. Give us our proper AC games and do whatever else you want to do on the side.

joelsantos24
06-19-2018, 09:19 AM
And, as I've said before, use the setting to make an Assassin game to go with the time period.

I think Origins tried hard to recognise what had been lost about the original appeal of AC, and one of those things is the strong structure of chapters. In AC1, the loop was powerful and addictive: Al Mualim's conversations with you (and their subtle changes and hints), the quest for intel, your plan and execution, and escape. That's something I love in some stylistic movies. Kill List springs to mind; the screen goes to black between 'chapters' to announce the next target in stark white letters: "THE PRIEST", "THE ARCHIVIST", "THE POLITICIAN". That strong demarcation, when you're being led down an ever-darker path towards some kind of resolution, is a great dramatic measure, which gives you some hint of the ending's approach via your awareness of how far you've travelled.

But as much as Origins tried to give us The Heron, The Ibis, The Ram, The Crocodile and so on, we got them diluted in a 100h game with no urgency about any of them. So I'd love to see a game like Odyssey for the generalist warrior, maybe still from the Assassin clan but with a personality and goals to suit the RPG game, and then a second game which uses that world-building to deliver a tighter, sharper "true Assassin" game with a different story: something around 15-20h, with more detail-orientated construction, convoluted political shenanigans, more interiors, and more of a secret agent vibe. Maybe even first-person! Dishonored and Dishonored 2 really, really work as assassin games, and the engine is so impressive now that it could surely support 1st-person view without looking strange at all.
I agree. However, that remarks a more linearly structured path to the storyline. In that perspective, the story takes precedent. I love that. However, stories aren't one of Ubisoft's strengths, and they don't plan to change that anytime soon. When Unity was released, one of it's directors even went as far as stating that they wanted to include even less narrative elements in their games, in the future.

Ubisoft is all about services, and therefore, all about RPG's. Stories, like you said and very well, are irreparably diluted in +100 hour games, while grinding endlessly for some resources, in order to craft whatever pointless item that you want. God of War was a perfect example of how you can built a semi-linear or semi-open world game, and still be all about the story while revolutionising the medium. Sucker Punch's approach is also important to underline, whilst creating and developing The Ghost of Tsushima. The game will be an open world, stealth action experience, and they're also trying to reimagine and reinvent the open world perspective. They didn't say much on the topic, but all the secondary missions will fundamentally contribute to the story and character development.

It comes down to what you want your game to be like, either a vast, empty service, or a deep, meaningful experience. Ubisoft is clearly more interested in the former.

Wombles-_-
06-19-2018, 10:31 AM
It comes down to what you want your game to be like, either a vast, empty service, or a deep, meaningful experience. Ubisoft is clearly more interested in the former.

To do the latter Ubisoft would need to take more time with the game, and I personally think they are to greedy for that option. What happened with Assassins Creed is they pumped them out too quickly and with no real thought behind it, look at Rock Star their games sell on their reputation they don't need E3 or the likes to sell their games for a reason.

joelsantos24
06-19-2018, 10:40 AM
To do the latter Ubisoft would need to take more time with the game, and I personally think they are to greedy for that option. What happened with Assassins Creed is they pumped them out too quickly and with no real thought behind it, look at Rock Star their games sell on their reputation they don't need E3 or the likes to sell their games for a reason.
Exactly. Right now, we know that, at least two more AC games, are already in development. There's no time to absorb the reactions, the reviews, the strengths and weaknesses, the criticism, what worked best and what didn't work, because the games are already too far gone in development, in order to meaningfully change anything. The only thing that made them effectively stop and evaluate, was the fact that Syndicate was a flop.

Great companies don't need all that promotion to forward their ideas and their quality. Their games do it for them, and that's why companies such as Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Santa Monica, etc, are praised and revered as the greatest.

Wombles-_-
06-19-2018, 10:50 AM
Ah Naughty Dog always makes me smile when I hear their name, remember getting Crash Bandicoot for my daughter years ago, loved the opening where the dog breaks out of the box. :)

Sadly Joe we just have to except the way Assassins Creed has been heading for a long time now, or as I might do and not buy it. If do purchase it I won't be think Assassins Creed i'll be buying it as some sort of Spartan warrior game, and the Spartan warrior part is the only thing selling this too me, if it had been any other period it would have been a non runner for me.

joelsantos24
06-19-2018, 11:02 AM
Ah Naughty Dog always makes me smile when I hear their name, remember getting Crash Bandicoot for my daughter years ago, loved the opening where the dog breaks out of the box. :)

Sadly Joe we just have to except the way Assassins Creed has been heading for a long time now, or as I might do and not buy it. If do purchase it I won't be think Assassins Creed i'll be buying it as some sort of Spartan warrior game, and the Spartan warrior part is the only thing selling this too me, if it had been any other period it would have been a non runner for me.
Yeah, I don't think I'll be buying this one, either. I've been even thinking about moving on entirely from the series. I don't want to play another absolute RPG. I don't want to spend any more money on games, right now, so I might just sell everything I have on AC and finally get/play the Tomb Raider series. There's currently another amazing promotion on PSN, with the first two chapters of the series bellow 15 euros.

ProdiGurl
06-19-2018, 11:26 AM
In my case, most of my gaming depends on my $$ situation - I don't have $60 laying around to just throw out for games so alot of games I really want, I don't pick up at release. So I'd have to say no, I wouldn't just run out & buy this bcuz I don't do that with other series I Love. I'd def. rent this to play.

My thing w/ AC is my fondness for Ezio - AC links me to him becuz they share the same order of Assassins/same goals - so whatever they do w/ the Lore, there's that tie & connection w/ AC making it special to me even tho it's much more about gameplay. Imo, all they need Modern Day scenes for is to show how they're linking to being the Assassin from a past time in history & let's get to playing!

If Ubi ended AC altogether, then I'd be alot more apt to buy/play the new IP - it would give me at least a similar feel AC to fill that void & make me happy.

Wombles-_-
06-19-2018, 11:38 AM
The moving on from the series has been with me from ACIII (who else could turn a Mohawk into a wuss), I think when Ezio died I should have let the game die too, it probably did any way.

joelsantos24
06-19-2018, 11:55 AM
The moving on from the series has been with me from ACIII (who else could turn a Mohawk into a wuss), I think when Ezio died I should have let the game die too, it probably did any way.
I think that, for me, it's about time I let go. I really thought they were taking a similar approach with Origins, than they did with AC2, and build another trilogy. Bayek was a good character, the story wasn't perfect, but the context and the setting were appealing and there was room to build. Then Odyssey is revealed and turns out they're throwing everything out the window, just so they perfect their little "service".

ProdiGurl
06-19-2018, 12:28 PM
The moving on from the series has been with me from ACIII (who else could turn a Mohawk into a wuss), I think when Ezio died I should have let the game die too, it probably did any way.
I went thru a long 'mourning' period after ACR.... fans base a game on the game they first played - that sets their 'standard' of what the game is supposed to be. When I played Brotherhood, I thought Ezio was the permanent protagonist to every game that would follow bcuz I was clueless to the Lore & prior 2 games. Anything veering from what Brotherhood was doing, was foreign.
Same with Resident Evil - I came in on RE4, so I based RE series on what 4 was doing, anything that veered from that I didn't care much for. Many early RE fans disliked 4 and on.

As for ACIII, alot of my problem was lack of ambient music - it became alot less prominant - plus Ezio's absence. I couldn't warm up to any characters after him. Origins was the first game that brought that joy of AC back to me so strongly w/ a character I bonded with. So much so that I played ACO twice back to back.

I do wish they at least did 1 more game w/ Bayek - post Aya. I LOVED him - almost equally to Ezio (very hard to accomplish!).
But hey, 300 - Sparta?!? In Greece?!? I'm all in.

Wombles-_-
06-19-2018, 02:49 PM
I think that, for me, it's about time I let go. I really thought they were taking a similar approach with Origins, than they did with AC2, and build another trilogy. Bayek was a good character, the story wasn't perfect, but the context and the setting were appealing and there was room to build. Then Odyssey is revealed and turns out they're throwing everything out the window, just so they perfect their little "service".

I think your right with Origins it was bit lax, but I actually thought that they would produce a sequel, I thought Bayek was only getting started when Origins ended.

joelsantos24
06-19-2018, 04:36 PM
I think your right with Origins it was bit lax, but I actually thought that they would produce a sequel, I thought Bayek was only getting started when Origins ended.
That was exactly my thought, I really believed it was just the beginning for Bayek. I was actually envisioning him going to Greece or even Rome, in a possible third chapter.

Anyway, I just sold everything I had on AC. My version of Origins is digital, so I'll definitely replay it countless times in the future, but as for the rest, I'm moving on. It's a shame and I'll always remain a hardcore fan of the series, but I have to move on. The Odyssey path is just too much for me.

MnemonicSyntax
06-19-2018, 05:31 PM
How are these games supposed "cash grabs" and it's all about "greed" while offering games with 100+ hours of content as a service? That doesn't make sense to me. If it's a cash grab, wouldn't they just tell a meager 30 hour story and then move onto the next to keep spoon-feeding the fans?

Trying to prolong the life of a game doesn't seem like trying to get people to buy their next one either, even if the prolonging is artificial.

Might as well go sub-based at that point.

ProdiGurl
06-19-2018, 06:49 PM
That was exactly my thought, I really believed it was just the beginning for Bayek. I was actually envisioning him going to Greece or even Rome, in a possible third chapter.
.
The video from a Dev I found at E3 said they started Odyssey right after Syndicate... so that might mean that they had no plan to continue Bayek past one game? Since they start games so early, it may be why they don't go the route we expect they might after the game we just played gets good fan feedback & support on things they did.

MnemonicSyntax
06-19-2018, 07:02 PM
I never heard of any confirmation that Bayek would be getting more than one game.

I think a lot of this is just wishful thinking wrapped up in disappointment when they didn't see it fulfilled.

ModernWaffle
06-19-2018, 09:38 PM
I never heard of any confirmation that Bayek would be getting more than one game.

I think a lot of this is just wishful thinking wrapped up in disappointment when they didn't see it fulfilled.

Although they never confirmed that Bayek would be returning, I think it would've been a highly logical move. He was very popular and if there is going to be a trilogy it invites the same protagonist for all three games (or at the very least,a set of protagonists who are somehow related to each other like the Kenway saga).

One of the fundamental flaws after Ezio was that they kept switching the protagonist. Not only does this do a major disservice to any notion of story-telling but it puts pressure on them of having to create a new main character in each subsequent title where personality traits are tried and tested into we reach full circle. It's one of the main problems that I thought they would be eager to address having had the year break for Origins to rethink things carefully?

But I don't think dropping Bayek was entirely in their control because Odyssey was probably so late in development during Origins's release that they couldn't afford to risk keeping the same protagonist if the reception was bad. Yet, lack of commitment (whether by intention or due to the pressure of releasing Odyssey so quickly after Origins) is never a good indication for future prospects of the series.

MnemonicSyntax
06-19-2018, 09:49 PM
We haven't had a returning protag since Ezio. He's become the exception, not the rule. I don't know why people would think differently.

And I love Bayek. Would loved to have seen him return and maybe he will. But, I didn't have any expectations.

ProdiGurl
06-19-2018, 10:03 PM
Bayek's the only one I'd really want to play again - post Aya... - we need to have him find another assassin and get remarried :rolleyes:but I don't know where a good location would be for him.
I wonder with such positive reception to him, if they might go back to him. Real doubtful.
I'm expecting Japan soon, so many have requested to go there. I've had all my favorite locations & am very content.

>>One of the fundamental flaws after Ezio was that they kept switching the protagonist. <<
Kind of a catch-22 . . they're already working on future games with their character in mind & can't know how well a character will be received till it's too late. Don't know if going to 2 year releases would solve that

ModernWaffle
06-19-2018, 10:07 PM
We haven't had a returning protag since Ezio. He's become the exception, not the rule. I don't know why people would think differently.

And I love Bayek. Would loved to have seen him return and maybe he will. But, I didn't have any expectations.

Partly due to the original Origins leak plus as I said, logic. I don't think there's much benefit of having to change your protagonist every game, just a waste of time and resources. I presume they had at least some opportunity to keep Bayek but I can't think of a good enough reason to go with new protagonists since it invites more problems as we're seeing right now.


Bayek's the only one I'd really want to play again - post Aya... - we need to have him find another assassin and get remarried :rolleyes: but I don't know where a good location would be for him.

I was also hoping to play as Bayek again because I don't feel his (and Aya's) story was quite finished because the Hidden Ones was not explored at all and as their relationship ended quite abruptly without real clarification.

ProdiGurl
06-19-2018, 10:12 PM
Well with this whole new 'we have to add females' into all these game roles, they may be considering 2 protags to offer both genders each game? Not sure if I like resources being used up that way.