PDA

View Full Version : Poll-Should they add the option to use shields in Assassin's Creed Odyssey?



Pages : [1] 2

datAssassin2018
06-27-2018, 09:00 PM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

Frag_Maniac
06-27-2018, 10:18 PM
Of course they should. Why would anyone vote no to this when it's just an option that would if anything appease more players, sell more copies, and yield more cash flow for long term support? I also find it kinda suspect that the one person that voted no so far did not comment, as if to make it look like a non issue, yet with no explanation to back it up.

OxIdOAC
06-28-2018, 06:04 AM
I voted no. Simply don't like to use shields, never used it in Origins except when narrative force me to use it. On the other hand Spartan shields do look awesome...

gordon677
06-28-2018, 07:20 AM
I really like the shields the in this game, I wouldn't mind using one. But at this point I think it too late to add it in. And I will enjoy the game with or with out them, it looks great to me. They do look much better in this game than Origins.

Cidius7
06-28-2018, 08:12 AM
Of course yes !

I prefer to play more realistic way with a real spear or a sword with a spartan shield.
I don't wanna use a god little broken spear it's too much for me.
If they don't add shields i am gonna play with 2hands spears but i am going to cry every time i see a spartan shield ...:(

datAssassin2018
06-28-2018, 08:22 AM
I voted no. Simply don't like to use shields, never used it in Origins except when narrative force me to use it. On the other hand Spartan shields do look awesome...

Why you didn't vote yes since you like spartan shields.I understand why you voted no but the question asked if they should give an additional option for players that want to use it.Why people are so negative I don't understand.

gordon677
06-28-2018, 09:39 AM
I think they should just go with their vision and what they're designing the game to be, and it looks like that's not using shields. I'm fine with that!

datAssassin2018
06-28-2018, 10:09 AM
I think they should just go with their vision and what they're designing the game to be, and it looks like that's not using shields. I'm fine with that!

Fair enough. I will buy the game regardless but I won't fully enjoy it if I can't use a shield.It's not authentic to me. Here's my suggestion to Ubisoft. They could give us a PoE(Piece of Eden) shield as dlc(aegis of zeus/shield of hercules/shield of perseus/shield of achilles). It could function more defensively than the spear of Leonidas. We could fight the Greek gods or mythological creatures to claim it.It's an amazing idea, let's hope they will consider it.

gordon677
06-28-2018, 11:15 AM
Fair enough. I will buy the game regardless but I won't fully enjoy it if I can't use a shield.It's not authentic to me. Here's my suggestion to Ubisoft. They could give us a PoE(Piece of Eden) shield as dlc(aegis of zeus/shield of hercules/shield of perseus/shield of achilles). It could function more defensively than the spear of Leonidas. We could fight the Greek gods or mythological creatures to claim it.It's an amazing idea, let's hope they will consider it.

Maybe as just part of the DLC we could start a quest chain and at the end we get a PoE shield. That will open shield options to us. I'm not saying raids, just a story of who it belonged to and the history behind behind it.

Ubi-QuB3
06-28-2018, 02:17 PM
Fair enough. I will buy the game regardless but I won't fully enjoy it if I can't use a shield.It's not authentic to me. Here's my suggestion to Ubisoft. They could give us a PoE(Piece of Eden) shield as dlc(aegis of zeus/shield of hercules/shield of perseus/shield of achilles). It could function more defensively than the spear of Leonidas. We could fight the Greek gods or mythological creatures to claim it.It's an amazing idea, let's hope they will consider it.

Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

MnemonicSyntax
06-28-2018, 03:39 PM
Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

Asking the real questions.

Grayfox-87-
06-28-2018, 05:23 PM
Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

I understand him what he meens, its because every Story of a Spartan Warrior (be it a Movie or a Historical Information or somthing else) show us a Spartan with Shield, and this is in all of our Heads - on the other Side - i was for about 2 Week in Greece for sightseeing and i wals also into Sparti - and there was a little museum that explained how the Spartan Warrior fight - they use the Shield just into here Phalanx, if the Phalanx was broken they have to remove they shields and fight without them - because it was to heavy (a little bit over 90cm and a weight from 8 - 10Kg) it was unwieldy to fight men vs men if they never fight into there Phalanx!

IMO i loved the Shield in ORIGINS - and i know i will miss them into Odyssey - but one mistake you have done Ubisoft is to not give us the OPTION to use them!
I have seen a Gameplay Vid on YT - this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DrbvmVvgrw&lc=z22qszmqrw3rzxtaa04t1aokg5qrw1k4egvfh0szkahlrk0 h00410.1530113505997656
while Alexios "NEVER" use the Spear of LEONIDAS if he Fight with a Spear in his right Hand and the left Hand is free - you know what i meen? it seems there was a place for a shield :)
Thats a little bit weard IMO.

datAssassin2018
06-28-2018, 05:28 PM
Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

Hi Ubi-QuB3,

Let me explain why it isn't. Shields were very important in ancient Greek warfare. The ancient Greeks used the famous phalanx formation(a shield wall). All ancient Greek warriors(mercenaries, citizen soldiers, picked hoplites, spartans, marines) carried a shield. In the game I've seen that Alexios/Kassandra and many soldiers don't carry a shield.
The game is set in the Peloponnesian war and I would really like to have the option to fight like an ancient Greek hoplite with a shield and and spear/sword. For me it doesn't feel authentic that we can't fight like this. It feels unnatural and anticlimatic that our character can't have the option to use a shield ,while some of our enemies can in an age that shields were a mandatory piece of equipment.


Let me give you an example. Imagine if the game was set in Feudal Japan. The protagonist is a ronin(samurai without a master) that fights samurai throughout the game. Samurai were famous for their katana(Japanese swords). Ronin(our protagonist is one) fought with a katana just like a samurai. Now imagine that our hero wields a broken naginata(Japanese spear, Piece of Eden artifact) as his primary weapon and he can't fight with a katana,although he is a ronin and he battles against Japanese samurai. It would feel very unreal and most people that love traditional Japanese culture and warfare would get really dissapointed. In Japanese warfare the most distinguished weapon was the katana while in ancient Greek warfare it was the hoplon/aspis(shield).


I think I will enjoy the game because I like the era that it takes place but I have a small suggestion for the developers. Since the game was created without a shield in mind, I believe it would be a very good idea to add a Piece of Eden shield(aegis of zeus, shield of hercules, shield of theseus, shield of perseus, shield of achilles) for our characters to use. You could add this additional weapon in an upcoming dlc for Assassin's Creed Odyssey. This shield could replace the spear of Leonidas. It could function differently and give us the option to play more defensively in the game. We could even fight Greek gods and mythological monsters to acquire it!

TheGeekAssassin
06-28-2018, 09:27 PM
I Would love the Option to use Shields. It just seems like a weird omission when it could have given us further options for fighting and customization of our style to include shields or to not use them. it just would have been nice to have the option to make the decission ourselves instead of having it taken out of our hands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJW0tROvzNc&t

Eagle017
06-28-2018, 10:39 PM
I've read the Phalanx-argument quite often across all forums but don't forget that for most of the time the Protagonist is a single fighter. A Phalanx only works if there are multiple people forming it. Ask Ephialtes from the movie 300. It maybe would have been a nice thing to have but the devs decided not to include it and that's ok since there are reasons why they excluded it (faster, more aggressive combat etc.). At the end of the day you don't tell a painter what paints he has to use.

Frag_Maniac
06-28-2018, 11:48 PM
Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.
Kinda makes it obvious all the accuracy research was put into the environment and not the combat. Do you really not know that shields were an essential staple of Spartan combat? Yeah, I know, we've been told the hero isn't really Spartan anymore, yet he still dresses like one, kicks like one, and carries a Spartan spear, so it's pretty much a cop out. What they should have said is "We wanted to reinvent Spartan combat style on a whim". At least it would have been honest.

I've read the Phalanx-argument quite often across all forums but don't forget that for most of the time the Protagonist is a single fighter. A Phalanx only works if there are multiple people forming it. Ask Ephialtes from the movie 300.
Not entirely true, while it was indeed effective to lock together while big waves of enemies were rushing, there were also plenty of scenarios once the enemies thinned out where they took on enemies on their own, and the 300 movie you used as an example clearly showed that.

I've yet to see any combat in this game where big waves of enemies rush in and you need to lock together with others to fend them off. It wouldn't even be practical to have such a thing in a game that from a player's perspective is mostly one hero against multiple enemies. So it's kinda obvious a shield would be as effective here as the scenes in 300 where it shows each Spartan fighting man to man without locking together.

...if the Phalanx was broken they have to remove they shields and fight without them - because it was to heavy...
While that may indeed be true, that is obviously NOT the reason Ubi omitted them, because clearly they show the hero flicking enemy shields long distances like they're toy Frisbees. What I'm saying is if they're going to make a hero that has a super kick, super shield grab and toss, and a super spear, it's not exactly going out of character to assume he's able to carry the weight of a shield, especially considering it's a fake RPG with no carry weight limitation and you can literally cram tons of weapons in your inventory.

At the end of the day you don't tell a painter what paints he has to use.
More to the point, at the end of the day, a developer whom fancies himself a painter, especially in a game with lots of RPG features, paints himself into a corner by forcing the player to use one style, instead of letting them choose their own. A video game isn't just a painting on the wall to look at, it's supposed to be an interactive form of media, and the more you cram the player into forced choices, the less interactive it becomes.

Megas_Doux
06-29-2018, 12:48 AM
I kinda get why they are using the "no spartan but mercenary alibi" but in the end they just did want to include it and that's it......

My two cents on that? Well I believe they though using the EXACT same kind of combat gameplay and looks in a game that already shares ENOUGH similarities with its predecessors could hurt them even more. I'm getting "Syndicate'" vibes combat wise about this game and don't find that particularly enticing to be honest.

Frag_Maniac
06-29-2018, 02:35 AM
I kinda get why they are using the "no spartan but mercenary alibi" but in the end they just did want to include it and that's it.....
Except they can't really say "no Spartan" when the hero has Spartan clothes, kick, and spear. They left more Spartan things in than they removed. It's a pretty obvious cop out to say he's not a Spartan is the reason for no shield, and the use of dodge, roll, and parry is no reason either because Origins had that, and obviously Origins had shields.

RafSwi77
06-29-2018, 11:22 AM
I don't think, that they will rework the combat system so close to the release date. We might only hope, that they will add shields in some future DLC.

The entire "he/she is no longer a Spartan" thing is totally wrong. The shield was an essential piece of equipment during that era. Greek warrior would rather fight without his helmet or bronze cuirass but not without his shield. Even Herodotus when describing Persians without their shields called them "naked".

Only skirmishers (archers, javelinmen etc.) and cavalrymen were comonly not using shields at that time.

SUPERSANDSY12
06-29-2018, 12:47 PM
I vote YES
I believe you should always be given the option and your play style will dictate what you chose to do. Gives a little more of that individual aspect to the game.

MilesHawk10
06-29-2018, 05:46 PM
I voted Yes.
Because I believe shields are very important in Ancient Greece that we will play role in the war. It's important to use them if we need them. I think it's a good idea to use them in option if players want to or don't want to use shields. I hope we can get a different shield as well as Athens, Corinth, Melos, and Boeotia.

Frag_Maniac
06-29-2018, 09:04 PM
Another reason it's idiotic not to have a shield, that someone pointed out recently on another thread, is how the hell are you supposed to block arrows? I mean you'd have to have a lightning fast Jedi sword block to fend them all off without shield. I'm really surprised this was not mentioned before, because it's another one of those things that sticks out like a sore thumb, and I doubt Ubi will have a rational explanation for it.

LUR21
06-29-2018, 09:29 PM
Another reason it's idiotic not to have a shield, that someone pointed out recently on another thread, is how the hell are you supposed to block arrows? I mean you'd have to have a lightning fast Jedi sword block to fend them all off without shield. I'm really surprised this was not mentioned before, because it's another one of those things that sticks out like a sore thumb, and I doubt Ubi will have a rational explanation for it.

This game is being done by Syndicate's team. I can see that dodging arrows will probably be the same as dodging bullets in Syndicate which is going to be horrible.

The thing is that they're advertising choice but don't give you the choice of choosing how you want to fight. Even if they did not agree with how supposedly passive shield combat,is that should be player choice full stop. Making this game they worked along side Origin's team from the start. They should have had the option of a shield from the start as it is too late to add now. It's like they said to the Origin's team, I see what you did with combat there but our way is better. Both options should have been added.

Slimgrin
06-29-2018, 11:04 PM
Yes to shields. And I want a hidden blade, not a magical broken spear.

ReDLaCES22
06-30-2018, 04:56 AM
I would love if the game included your character to use a shield or block. I can understand the omission because they wanted to do something different from Origins that fell in line with the whole theme of Greece and playing as s this visceral Spartan hero/heroine but to remove the shield or blocking feels almost blasphemy and contradictory to how soldiers maintained defense back in the day. Please include a shield or block option. That would be highly welcomed :)

Eagle-Bearer
07-02-2018, 02:34 PM
Voted YES.
It's a shame that Ubisoft dictate us the way we have to play. I prefer not having the choice of dialogues rather than not having choice to play as I wanna play !

WendysBrioche
07-03-2018, 01:29 AM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

I voted no, not because I don't think it should be there but because the game is likely way too far in development to incorporate them.

If they're capable of doing it without going out of there way and killing themselves doing it, then yes, but I just don't see it happening. They have to design new weapons, maybe they can just use the skins for the swords they're already using, but still it means new animations and doing 25% of the work in that department all over again. Seems like too much at this point.

To avoid things like this in future games I advise anyone posting here on the forums to be VERY vocal about features they LIKE in the game. Believe it or not the developers DO listen, sometimes even way too much.

A bunch of people complained the shield was too un-assassinish, made Bayek feel less like an Assassin, enough people probably didn't say they liked the shields so the developers probably took that as a reason to get rid of them.

I remember saying I liked the shields for Ancient settings like Ancient Egypt and Classical Greece, but I wasn't super vocal about it either, so that was probably a fault on my part paying small contribution to that.

OxIdOAC
07-03-2018, 05:29 AM
Well, you can vote all day, but the game is pretty much DONE, and Ubisoft is decided that they DON'T want shields in this game, maybe in the next game?
I read somewhere that this is a trilogy in making, Egypt, Greece and Rome, so, do centurions have shields? Yes they have.
Or, maybe, next protagonist would be like Spartacus or Gladiator type of character. Fighting for freedom? Did they have shields? Spartacus did. So did Russell Crowe. :cool:

Grayfox-87-
07-03-2018, 05:43 AM
I voted no, not because I don't think it should be there but because the game is likely way too far in development to incorporate them.

I agree with you - BUT:
Like you say, the Game is "too far in development" - but I thought about it - how it could works with the shield - a Example:

You can see that Alexios never use the SOL if hey fight with the Spear, i guess this will also be with other weapons too (see this vid):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DrbvmVvgrw&lc=z22qszmqrw3rzxtaa04t1aokg5qrw1k4egvfh0szkahlrk0 h00410

The Problem:
But if we take a closer look to the sice of the Hoplitan Shield you will see that if you have them equiped (like Bayek has - on his back), it will completly cover your Hero and you cant see him/her!
The Solution:
So my thoughts: what if the Shield is instead on his Back - on the saddle of his Horse - if you need them/or you will fight with them - call Phebos (dont remember his name :P) pick it up from him and fight with your shield - this meens: use the shield just for specific weapons like the Spear (dont remove the SOL)...!

just my thoughts they could implant into a DLC or something else...!

And add a SPARTAN Beard for Alexios :)

datAssassin2018
07-03-2018, 09:14 AM
I voted no, not because I don't think it should be there but because the game is likely way too far in development to incorporate them.

If they're capable of doing it without going out of there way and killing themselves doing it, then yes, but I just don't see it happening. They have to design new weapons, maybe they can just use the skins for the swords they're already using, but still it means new animations and doing 25% of the work in that department all over again. Seems like too much at this point.

To avoid things like this in future games I advise anyone posting here on the forums to be VERY vocal about features they LIKE in the game. Believe it or not the developers DO listen, sometimes even way too much.

A bunch of people complained the shield was too un-assassinish, made Bayek feel less like an Assassin, enough people probably didn't say they liked the shields so the developers probably took that as a reason to get rid of them.

I remember saying I liked the shields for Ancient settings like Ancient Egypt and Classical Greece, but I wasn't super vocal about it either, so that was probably a fault on my part paying small contribution to that.

Yeah, I fear that it won't happen as well and that my attempt is in vain. Even if it is too late, I wanted to point out their wrong and maybe see a change in some form in this game. Their decision not to use shields makes zero sense. We are a mercenary(not an assassin)and in the middle of a war.

What pains me the most is that Ubisoft is a company that pays attention to historical accuracy(the devs went to Greece and consulted historians for this game) and I've waited for a good ancient Greek setting since Warriors:Legends of Troy(Tecmo-Koei).

I think they can incorporate shields by using stuff that are already in the game. They can use existing models and animations or they can add a unique Issu shield later. Some hair and beard customization for our characters would be cool too.

De3ug_
07-25-2018, 05:07 AM
Asking the real questions.

bc in ancient greece the shield was an integral part of combat, warfare culture and status, a warrior without a shield wasnt a thing back then. in sparta for example soldiers who came home from war without their shield were dishonored. "come home with your shield, or on it" mercenary, outcast or not. Removing the shield in a timeframe like this is unauthentic as it can be. its like surgically removing a boxers hands and then ask why he cant go into thw ring anymore.

MnemonicSyntax
07-25-2018, 06:30 AM
bc in ancient greece the shield was an integral part of combat, warfare culture and status, a warrior without a shield wasnt a thing back then. in sparta for example soldiers who came home from war without their shield were dishonored. "come home with your shield, or on it" mercenary, outcast or not. Removing the shield in a timeframe like this is unauthentic as it can be. its like surgically removing a boxers hands and then ask why he cant go into thw ring anymore.

Except our heroes are outcasts. Who knows what society they're from when their own father throws them off a cliff and leaves them for dead.

I also love how suddenly everyone is some type of historical expert based on what? 300?

In addition, no shield has been "taken." The heroes don't seem to have one to begin with.

Lastly, my statement was meant to be ironic because again, no one but Ubisoft knows the minutae of the story. Some people feel like it's not "authentic" based on what we think we know.

Frag_Maniac
07-25-2018, 07:33 AM
Clearly the poll still weighs in favor of having a shield option, by nearly 2/3 of the vote. Are Ubi even watching this, do they even care? I think the answer is obvious. They just plod ahead anymore with their silly version of history, a very arcade and distorted one.

RecycleUrArrows
07-26-2018, 01:33 AM
Honestly, I want them because the characters look aesthetically awkward without them given the way they are dressed most of the time. I constantly feel as if something is missing in every single trailer I watch, and that the combat looks just a bit silly without a shield.

Vogue77
07-26-2018, 12:13 PM
I am confident that having shields at launch date is non-realistic, I'd rather have them devote their resources / time to polishing the game out (animations, lypsinc, combat, hitboxes, squashing bugs etc) so I voted no with those thoughts in mind.

However, down the road, I am all up for shields and any other weapon / defenses / archery items / mounts whatever they feel fancy doing - given they have the time to do it right. Maybe even expand on sea combat and make BIG, like really HUGE naval battles you can take part in (just like you do on land). Now that would be A-mazing!

TeaBagHitter
07-26-2018, 03:10 PM
I am confident that having shields at launch date is non-realistic, I'd rather have them devote their resources / time to polishing the game out (animations, lypsinc, combat, hitboxes, squashing bugs etc) so I voted no with those thoughts in mind.

However, down the road, I am all up for shields and any other weapon / defenses / archery items / mounts whatever they feel fancy doing - given they have the time to do it right. Maybe even expand on sea combat and make BIG, like really HUGE naval battles you can take part in (just like you do on land). Now that would be A-mazing!

It feels weird for them to include shields post-launch
It's like a whole new combat style and it would change a lot in terms of gameplay, i believe they should postpone the game a month or two more if need be, as long as it will give us fans what we really look forward to.
I don't think someone would disagree or hate ubisoft for postponing the game if they will really make it better and use this time to work on it.

However it is true that their main priority should be to polish the animations and perfect them as they play a huge role in the impression the game has on us

Vogue77
07-26-2018, 05:03 PM
It feels weird for them to include shields post-launch
It's like a whole new combat style and it would change a lot in terms of gameplay, i believe they should postpone the game a month or two more if need be, as long as it will give us fans what we really look forward to.
I don't think someone would disagree or hate ubisoft for postponing the game if they will really make it better and use this time to work on it.

However it is true that their main priority should be to polish the animations and perfect them as they play a huge role in the impression the game has on us

If the people wanting shields in game would be something like 75%+ of their customers, I could see it happen. However, neither here or on steam forums are the shield topics massive by any means, which signals to me that the game will sell just fine in it's current implementation (combat wise, with PoE Spear of Leonidas), after all most of the buyers will buy the game for the gameplay / setting - what was shown at E3 reveal / demo + various youtube vids, I'm positive that will also attract many non-AC players because who wouldn't want to Spartan Kick people off cliffs etc.

So I don't really think shield in ACOD will be a huge priority for them especially before game launches. But I hope they will add them later on, when they have time to implement them properly to add to gameplay and make combat more diverse or something :)

lilac.moon
08-17-2018, 06:49 PM
ἢ τὰν ἢ ἐπὶ τᾶς
Ḕ tā̀n ḕ epì tâs
"Either [with] it [your shield], or on it"
Meaning "either you will win the battle, or you will die and then be carried back home on your shield".
It was said by Spartan mothers to their sons before they went out to battle to remind them of their bravery and duty to Sparta and Greece.

SerraShaar
08-18-2018, 06:42 PM
I don't care for shield , never did and never will . Yes , I know..a proper Tank need that piece of metal to fight with . But I never liked the feel or the look of it .

In most games when there is a Shield option , I just go for dual wield instead . Same for Helmet (or hat) , Toggle them off whenever I can .

That said , there was one instance where I wished my character HAD a shield lol it just funny....its a Juggernaut (Tank) Sith in Swtor online . Cose she use one lightsaber..and her other hand just..is there...like..there should be something y'know ? So yeah that was the only time I wished for some Holo-shield like on that arm . Then I merely switched to Dual wield ..which felt much better .

Anyway , I still voted for 'Yes as an option'' . Because I don't think there is any harm to add them , as long as those who don't care for the shield..can get ride of it (or sell it) .

I also don't care if it's historicly accurate.....our weapons GLow...lol doubt they did in the real world .

having the option is always a +....in everything :)

Olympus2018
08-18-2018, 07:10 PM
I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

For the same reason a Brit is not authentic without his tea time or fish and chips. :o

DaelosTheCat
08-19-2018, 12:52 AM
I'm just gonna drop my +1 here and say shields are the most useful item in combat. There's no reason why not to use a shield. I guess the only reason would be to look BADASS and EPIC and AWESOME. Just give players the god mode already.

ProdiGurl
08-19-2018, 02:50 AM
Since playing w/ Shields in Origins, I'm fine without them this time esp. when we have that spear instead of the Hidden Blade. I didn't really master its use very well either. I don't know if Shields are historically authentic or not - I only know they were crucial in 300, but I sure do remember the complaints in Origins about the Shields looking so ridiculous on Bayek, etc. I'll do combat either way - with or without them but I'm fine without & won't care while playing ACOD.
There will be alot of great weapons to play Plus the Sparta Kick to keep me busy in combat. I don't know why this is turning into such a ginormous issue

FlyingMan78
08-19-2018, 09:43 AM
https://i.imgur.com/veE4GeJ.gif

GhostAssassinLT
08-19-2018, 10:01 AM
Believe it or not the developers DO listen, sometimes even way too much.

I think the proper thing to say is that they sometimes DO listen, but mostly they don't, reason being that at the start of development they make a plan of what they want the game to be like, what to include and not to include and they won't go public saying "We're working on this game and are thinking to include these things, but to excluse these things, what do you all think about this?", because then everyone knows what the game will be like and there's no anticipation or surprise for the fans.

Once they show the public what the game looks like and what you can do it's way past the point of no return for most of the features that fans want and when the fans start asking for this or that feature they have to find a nice way to say "fock off, this is what the game will be like...", so they start coming up with lame excuses for not thinking about the gazillion things the fans want and they didn't think of themselfs.

Personally I'm not that excited about Odyssey and if I buy it it wont be until the game is on sale, as AC in my opinion has turned into something I no longer feel is AC...

FlyingMan78
08-19-2018, 04:55 PM
I think the proper thing to say is that they sometimes DO listen, but mostly they don't, reason being that at the start of development they make a plan of what they want the game to be like, what to include and not to include and they won't go public saying "We're working on this game and are thinking to include these things, but to excluse these things, what do you all think about this?", because then everyone knows what the game will be like and there's no anticipation or surprise for the fans.

Once they show the public what the game looks like and what you can do it's way past the point of no return for most of the features that fans want and when the fans start asking for this or that feature they have to find a nice way to say "fock off, this is what the game will be like...", so they start coming up with lame excuses for not thinking about the gazillion things the fans want and they didn't think of themselfs.

Ubisoft DOES polls, I've received some in my email. Apart from Ubi, I can't remember a single developer that does it.. Companies do a market research about what worked before and WOULD work now. They don't go around asking each person what they would like in a videogame. They would get crazy, even more in a community so divided as this fan base. There's a little art in there, Ubi works first in what they like. And there's a little gambling too. What people liked in the past may not be what people like now, even the same people.

About all, they have to reach the WIDEST market they can, not just a small group that basically wants the same game every time.

MnemonicSyntax
08-19-2018, 09:27 PM
I think the proper thing to say is that they sometimes DO listen, but mostly they don't, reason being that at the start of development they make a plan of what they want the game to be like, what to include and not to include and they won't go public saying "We're working on this game and are thinking to include these things, but to excluse these things, what do you all think about this?", because then everyone knows what the game will be like and there's no anticipation or surprise for the fans.

Once they show the public what the game looks like and what you can do it's way past the point of no return for most of the features that fans want and when the fans start asking for this or that feature they have to find a nice way to say "fock off, this is what the game will be like...", so they start coming up with lame excuses for not thinking about the gazillion things the fans want and they didn't think of themselfs.

Personally I'm not that excited about Odyssey and if I buy it it wont be until the game is on sale, as AC in my opinion has turned into something I no longer feel is AC...

There's a thing called developer vision.

If it were up to only some of the fans, we'd still be playing Assassin's Creed II style of games. So while I don't agree with everything they do, developer vision is a boon to the franchise.

Ravenubi1991
09-14-2018, 03:34 PM
"Copy of my original thread after getting directed here."

https://i0.wp.com/www.geekassassin.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ACOdyssey_AlexioswithShield.jpg

Tl DR This is a mega non-sensical bad design decision and this thread goes into detail why and furthermore why its super stupid especially considering the setting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDpI6Zzy-vo = THIS is what I love. What I wanted to replicate sorta in this game. And knowing THIS cannot happen, I'm gonna get real bloody mad now. So brace yourselves for a rage thread.

Before ANYONE says it. I KNOW the developer reply and I thoroughly disgree with it. I find it to be the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.
Quote from Jonathan Dumont = "Our gameplay is much more versatile than that of Origins and a shield was not suited to it," Absolute ********. You press like 2 buttons with 4 extra's in shape of powers chosen from skills. The End. Its absolute nonsense that the shield made no sense or was a hindrance.

I wanted to buy this game bad. I LOVE ancient greece. I wanted to buy the huge editions. enjoy all the DLC, play as a cool spartan. Enjoy good armor. have a good time with the new RPG elements.

And then.... here I am, browsing gameplay and checking out the introduction video = https://youtu.be/xOsIBcfBtJU?t=123

First Leonidas leaves the phalanx which is horribly dumb but hey. Video game. Okay then...

But then.... He throws his F'ing shield ???????????????
This had me thinking: " Wait a freaking minute.... why the HELL would he do that? WHAT?! Why ?! And I began thinking the UNTHINKABLE...

" Can he even use shields in this game?"

Googled it. AND TADA.... Nope we can't. WHAT THE F#CK ???????????

So what, Ubisoft? because we became a mercenary we forgot how to use shields? W'ere bloody spartans and somehow we just magically forgot how to hold a barrier infront of us.

"doesn't fit" you said in your reply to this. YOu added dodging, parrying.

I have a question. WHY NOT JUST ADD THAT....WITHOUT taking away the shield? Are you completely oblivious to how iconic the shield is to NOT JUST SPARTA.... but to Ancient Greece as a whole. Let alone how many of us wanted to use shields after Origins?

You say you bring in historians and all that fancy stuff when making your games. DID NONE OF THEM...tell you it would be a fundamentally mindnumbingly bad of an idea to remove the shield from our 2 spartan main leads?

And before anyone begins giving me crap for my language. I dont care. This is mega infuriating and stupid. I wanted to buy this game. I wanted to play and enjoy this game.
But I can't like this.

WHY THE F#CK... are you dumbing down your game? For zero ****ing valid reason other than " It wouldn't fit"... WTF does that even mean LOL....

let the PLAYER decide what fits since we'll be the ones playing in various ways. You enabled 3 different skill trees for combat. What?? You couldn't add a shield to that and just carry over how shields worked from origins???

I dont even know what else to say. This is the biggest WTF ... of 2018 for me so far. I'm currently playing Tomb Raider and enjoying the UPGRADES over Rise. And figured " hey. Maybe I'll try another female lead game with AC Oddysey. Cool spartan features and all"

Little did I f'ing know you'd just outright dumb down the combat and COMPLETELY STRIP a greek warrior of his/Her's ICONIC CHOICE OF ARMS = The Shield.

I mean jesus ****ing christ, Lead Designer. Did you even read the beginning dialog when Kassandra meets up with the spartan commander at the beach? He comments on her being a spartan and she replies with " Used to be or lie" And he replies by saying: YOU'RE ALWAYS A SPARTAN...ITS IN YOUR BLOOD!

Yet merc profession means no shields for you. WHAT????????!!!!!!! This decision is making my blood .... boil. How the hell can you think this is a good idea? FROM ANY PERSPECTIVE? removing what works is good??? Dumbing down is good? WHAT!

Rant over.

This is dumb. This is silly. This is bad from a historical POV. Horrible from a gameplay POV. FUNDAMENTALLY INEPT from a customizable POV considering Origins had this feature and you copied SO much from origins here so its zero issue.


Constructive criticism: BRING BACK THE SHIELD. Ditch this HORRIBLE line of thought. ADD TO YOUR GAME...do NOT STRIP IT OF FUNCTIONAL AND COOL FEATURES. That...is BAD game design.


FINAL THOUGHTS: Do you guys remember when the spartans faced off against the persians at Thermopylae 2500 years ago and when the Persian Commander yelled: "SPARTANS! DROP YOUR WEAPONS".... and the spartans then proceeded to drop their shields...

Yeah.... me neither.


Edit: I felt like adding this because I saw a greek guy comment on one of the videos showing Thermopylae: "
Hellas Defender
3 hours ago
My ancestors...but a Spartans would never leave his shield. It was a RULE. The women were saying to their men, when they were leaving for battle: You will return with it or on it. Which means that they will return winners with the shield or they will die for Sparta..."

A spartan, soldier or not, respected his / her's shield. It was baked in the culture. It was part of their heart and soul.

Ubisoft. Get a grip. This is a colossal mistake. ADD BACK THE SHIELD. Come on, Ubisoft...

Its as bad as removing the Katana from a Samurai.

https://pre00.deviantart.net/f83d/th/pre/i/2013/029/a/a/300___leonidas_by_wns_tomm-d5t5wkz.jpg

Give us our shields!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Olympus2018
09-14-2018, 06:56 PM
THIS IS SPAAARR err Odyssey! So we are gonna have to live without shields.

ermacos
09-14-2018, 08:47 PM
Hi

I was confused in the beginning because as a Hellenic I know all spartans have shields but then I figure it out.

The shield is a sacred tool for spartans, it pass from a generation to a generation, from fathers to sons. Kassandra is a female but lets say "OK let her have it"... Then I remember she is also an abandoned child! Same applies to Alexios.

Ofcourse they could have any other kind of shield, but not a spartan one!

ONLY IF they give a special mission to go find your family or leftover relatives and get it from there!

Or the protagonist may have issues from her/his childhood and their country “ethics”, so Kassandra and Alexios refuse to have any kind of shield because their family, country abandon them at a very small age.

KmarkoPL
09-15-2018, 01:37 AM
Seriously ! This is not stupid 300 movie !!



The game main protagonist was kicked out by his family when he was just a child hence he does not possesses the the complete spartan skills of battle style. Also the main purpose of removing the shield was to replace it with the "Ancient Blade of first Civilization" which is also called The Spear of Leonidas. If Ubisoft would of kept the shield in one hand and another with spear, i think it would have not worked out so instead they have given the main protagonist the abilites in term of that shield with that spear. Also Alexios/Kassandra are mercenary and fights more like a Gladiator. Also they have replaced the Hidden blade with that spear which would have been not possible if they would of kept the shield. Plus having spear in one hand and a sword in another is not purely dual wielding in my opinion, because spear is only allowing the player to have abilites while on the other hand your main weapon grants you with weapon properties and different attack power and this combo will not workout with the shield.

ermacos
09-15-2018, 10:11 AM
the above reason given, is somewhat ok, somewhat stupid (sorry!).

As I said shields is a sacred thing from Spartans, it pass from generations to generations, it would be false and bad to grab someone else (Spartan) shield, Cassandras father was responsible to offer his shield to her, but again I dont think women owned shields in ancient Sparta..

I will translate an article about Spartan women

"Spartan women have been praised and defamed more than all other Greek women, from antiquity to the present day. They were the only Greek women for whom the state had taken care of their public education, which gave them a dominant position in physical activity. All men in Sparta were trained to become warriors, and the main task of women was to give birth to warriors. But they were forbidden to engage in manly jobs or profitable work. The Spartans were the only women who were naked during their training, like the men practicing and exercising on a permanent basis
Lykourgos (lawmaker and king of Sparta) first hardened the girls physically by letting them run, fight, fly disc and javelin/spears and bows. In this way, the embryos that were born would give a strong start to strong bodies and would grow better, while the women themselves would end their pregnancy vigorously.
He discarded every shyness, overprotection of children by the parents, and softness of all kinds. He forced the young girls the same way as the boys, to grow up to get used to walking barefoot, naked as well as dancing and singing at certain feasts in front of the young men and under their gaze. In some cases, girls could tease the boys by constructively criticizing their mistakes. There was nothing obscene and disrespectful about the nakedness of the girls. Ther was totally innocent and there was no trace of immorality. On the contrary, it encouraged simplicity, a simple way of life and sport, giving the female sex a taste of male bravery ....
As a result, women were talking and thinking in the way of a leader, like Leonidas's wife, Gorgo, spoke. When a foreign woman told her, "You Spartans are the only ones who can dominate men," she replied, "Why are we the only ones who give birth to men?"

So if you want to play RPG, you have to be naked.. boobs out... Forget about shields :p

So I suggest a poll

1) shields for females (something very different from reality)
2) all NPC's including protagonists totally naked (Npc's that emerge in training camps)


Now read bellow some more information about the festivities..

Lykourgos the lawmaker and king of Sparta also found a way to force men to get married a Spartan woman..

There was also a lure for men to get married. The parades of girls and the nakedness in the fights that young men watched, inspired by a non-spiritual impulse but a love attraction. Lykourgos denied certain political rights to those who remained unmarried, since he excluded them from the spectacle of the naked children. The custom was to abduct women to marry them when they were in the prime of their youth and ready for marriage ....

I could give you a suggestion, an RPG suggestion..

Since the story is focused on Kassandra and Alexios is an alternative choice but same skills and stuff.. In order to make it more placebo, to offer the chance for Alexios to get a shield (a mission to find his father or relative and get it)... But Kassandra in the other hand to have a different benefit and also experience a mission of ceremony/festivity how the women were in ancient Sparta.. That could be an interesting thing for an RPG.

Kassandra could have discs like boomerangs.. Discs is a very interesting weapon, also very assassin weapon and much faster attacks, used also as a mini shield deflecting attacks and also cool looking.

So at later stage of the game

Alexios receives a quest to try find his father or relative, a more imotional quest, I have no idea about the outcome but he ends up with a spartan shield upgradable..
Kassandra receives a quest to take part is some festivities, a parade for women (Like spartan women did) more fun than Alexios, ends up meeting a family member and she gets her discs..

Its so original and cute and fun! Small tweaks between those 2 toons. Alexios unlocks a shield equipment box and Kassandra discs.. To excuse the luck of this weapon because of training, while both can kill mythical monsters and lead an army, doesnt sound ...well..fine? In the other hand Kassandra CANNOT hold a shield because the spartan shield is very heavy! But she can hold discs.. Alexios can hold a shield.

Ravenubi1991
09-15-2018, 05:35 PM
Spartan shield. Athenian shield. I dont care. Just give us shields.

its a game. Its supposed to be fun and cool and this game is NOT REMOTELY historically accurate. You're fighting freaking gods later on. As well as gorgons.

So. Shields should be a thing. if for the sole reason that its good to have more player customization. Its that simple. Theres no reason to argue against it because it just takes away from the game that lowers ways of combat approach. And as someone else have pointed out over and over.

Did everyone just forget how cancer it was to fight archers in Origins? How the shield was a nice thing to have to block the arrows?
https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/8178oj/i_f_hate_archers_while_playing_in_nightmare/ There you go. A good ol thread about how important the shield was.

yeah. can't do that now. For 0 reason. Wont be very versatile as the lead designer said, when you end up like this...

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sbXEEzXghDg/maxresdefault.jpg

Bessas.
09-16-2018, 01:19 AM
Hey!

The game is Gold now, but please add shields to the game in post-launch. I want to shield bash my enemies :) And I`d like to fight with a shield and a spear.

Please add shields.

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

KmarkoPL
09-16-2018, 03:22 AM
I say it again !
THIS IS NOT ****ING 300 CRAP !!

What Hollywood movies stuff to your head is not what Ubisoft will do !!
The post launch content is also been already determined .
Crap shields will not happen !!

Ghost416
09-16-2018, 12:45 PM
I say it again !
THIS IS NOT ****ING 300 CRAP !!

What Hollywood movies stuff to your head is not what Ubisoft will do !!
The post launch content is also been already determined .
Crap shields will not happen !!
Don't know why your so hostile. Despite its stylized visuals, 300 has one of the most accurate depictions of phalanx warfare on screen. When they're actually in the formation, at least. The hoplite shield wasn't a fantastical creation of the movie, it was an integral part of warfare in ancient Greece.

Olympus2018
09-16-2018, 12:58 PM
Don't know why your so hostile. Despite its stylized visuals, 300 has one of the most accurate depictions of phalanx warfare on screen. When they're actually in the formation, at least. The hoplite shield wasn't a fantastical creation of the movie, it was an integral part of warfare in ancient Greece.

Well, 300 was only accurate when it came to phalanx formation, not hoplite's gear. Hoplites didn't show off their naked six-pack. They had armour to protect their chest, knees etc.

Ghost416
09-16-2018, 01:30 PM
Well, 300 was only accurate when it came to phalanx formation, not hoplite's gear. Hoplites didn't show off their naked six-pack. They had armour to protect their chest, knees etc.
That's what I was referring to by "stylized visuals." Yes, the movie isn't accurate with the way they're dressed or having goblin ninjas make up the Immortals, but the phalanx depicted is pretty accurate to how most historians believe it was organized and utilized. I doubt the front row would be down on one knee like they are in the movie, though.

Hercules starring Dwayne Johnson had a pretty awesome phalanx battle, too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QRnHyWhgG4

The movie is entertaining enough on its own, but if you haven't read them, I highly recommend the comics it's derived from, Hercules: The Thracian Wars and Hercules: The Knives of Kush. They're much better.

ermacos
09-16-2018, 03:55 PM
It is not natural or historical and I think AC is based historical information taken by books and paintings.. So Kassandra cannot have a shield, Alexios is a guest star and he could get it. But Alexios cannot get the shield while Kassandra gets nothing is it?

My suggestion stands,

Shield for Alexios with a personal for men story quest
Discs for Kassandra with a personal for women story quest
both at a later stage of the game.

Spartan women used discs like boomerangs so why not! I dont wish to see Kassandra with a shield because it will be another failed attempt to advertise spartans..

SgtWolf1
09-16-2018, 08:09 PM
Not sure how to vote on this one. It would be cool yes, but based on what I've seen from trailers etc, the piece of the spear is needed in using the extra abilities you gain and as I don't think you can just use it as weapon on it's own, so you couldn't use it with a shield. So my thinking is if you equip a shield and weapon and put away the piece of the spear, you would loose those abilities. I also think I saw in a trailer that piece of spear can deflect incoming attacks like a shield. So I would vote no as it don't think it would make sense in how the game story and mechanics are being done..

If I'm wrong though, or there is a better way to for the main character to utilize the power gained from the spear, then I would vote yes as I loved finding new shields in Origins. Though it always ticked me off they were so small and you only got a good size one from the DLC. Would be great to use from time to time with Alexios, but will more of a sneaking assassin with my Cassandra play through so would never use it.

I think it's hard to label what would be authentic here anyway. Generally the Spartans used shields as a unit to create a Phalanx, interlocking their shields for protection. So fighting on your own, it may not always make sense to use one. I think too many people are getting hung on, this is what a Spartan Warrior would do or what they saw in the movie 300, etc. From what I can tell, the character isn't a Spartan warrior. They are mercenaries and will use whatever means they need to survive and make money.

ProdiGurl
09-16-2018, 09:31 PM
Best fight scene ever - cannot wait to use Leonidas' Spear! (can't hear the music at this Library, mute if it's annoying) =)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P6KLKNIXj8

Ravenubi1991
09-16-2018, 09:44 PM
"I say it again !
THIS IS NOT ****ING 300 CRAP !!

What Hollywood movies stuff to your head is not what Ubisoft will do !!
The post launch content is also been already determined .
Crap shields will not happen !!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just because you have a beef with the movie, or with Origins shields, doesn't mean shields are outright bad or useless or disliked generally. Origins archers were insane and annoying. The shield saved me countless times.

And btw, dude. you're travelling back to ancient greece. Where the shield was iconic. Symbolic. Precious and baked into the very culture.
Your anger makes 0 sense at all....

Shields should happen for 3 reasons.

Nr 1: Its the ancient world. Why not use a shield for defensive playstyles?
nr 2: blocking arrows from archers is a GOOD idea.
Nr 3: Looks cool.

BONUS Nr 4: Player customization / Player choice is good for ANY game. Origins understood that.
Arguing against this = Arguing in favour for downgrades and restrictions that make the game poorer.

And thats that. Nobody is forcing you to use shields. But many of us would like to. Like we did in origins.

Olympus2018
09-17-2018, 08:58 AM
Best fight scene ever - cannot wait to use Leonidas' Spear! (can't hear the music at this Library, mute if it's annoying) =)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_P6KLKNIXj8

It's fun but also ridiculous! Look at the Spartan soldiers. Not much armour to cover their body. In reality, their legs and chests were fully covered by bronze armour.

ermacos
09-17-2018, 12:46 PM
The war dance/moves are real, but some sparts in the movie have short hair, without armor...

Ghost416
09-18-2018, 06:09 AM
From what I can tell, the character isn't a Spartan warrior.
They're the grandchild of Leonidas, thus a Spartan by birth. According to the story, they were cast out for some reason. But even then, all Greek hoplites used shields. They were by no means unique to the Spartans.

ProdiGurl
09-18-2018, 02:57 PM
It's fun but also ridiculous! Look at the Spartan soldiers. Not much armour to cover their body. In reality, their legs and chests were fully covered by bronze armour.
Well, I prefer the 300 Armour for obvious reasons I won't deny :D :cool: :rolleyes:

As to them being Spartan/using shields (in previous posts), they may be Spartan descendants, but it doesn't mean they're Spartan warriors necessarily that have to use Shields.

Olympus2018
09-18-2018, 04:41 PM
Well, I prefer the 300 Armour for obvious reasons :D :cool: :rolleyes:



Me too!

quanzaizai
09-18-2018, 04:45 PM
well the flashback from first hour show that you were outcast very early young around 7-10 years old, maybe we didn't have a chance to learn how to use shield.

Honelith
09-19-2018, 12:09 AM
I voted yes. I loved using a shield in Origins (and not just for free arrows), did they remove the shield in Odyssey to make it seem more like the old AC? It's odd. Not being able to hunt down awesome looking shield to slam your foes with makes me sad. Very sad.

SgtWolf1
09-19-2018, 01:44 AM
They're the grandchild of Leonidas, thus a Spartan by birth. According to the story, they were cast out for some reason. But even then, all Greek hoplites used shields. They were by no means unique to the Spartans.

Being born in Sparta meant nothing. You had to earn your place in their culture or where looked at as being 'less than' the rest of rest. Being cast out(though I think they may be tossed off a cliff like they did with kids who weren't seen as worthy...and I'm wondering if that piece of spear and it's power allows them survive), they would never have been able to even talk to a Spartan warrior. And yes, the rest of the Greeks used hoplites as part of their army, usually farmers etc. That being said, not sure why you are calling the main character a hoplite. They aren't part of any military unit in any of the trailers, probably will never even see then in a in Phalanx formation(though that would be cool) and only fought among them as Mercenaries from what I can tell. Of course I'm not sure either as we don't have the game yet that will flesh out their whole story, but what I'm getting from the trailers is they are going to do things their own way, fight/work for whoever they want, how they want, whatever they need to do to make money. This freedom I think will help with the narrative allowing great flexibility with the character without getting pigeon holed too much as being one thing or another.

I get it though, I'd love to use a shield too. The compendium in Origins kicked *** and I always loved getting a better looking shield with killer stats. The shields are in the game though, it sure would be great to use them. I was thinking perhaps they could make the piece of spear part of the shield. Maybe the handle on the back of shield. That way you still get those powers and could use a weapon in the other hand. Even as mercenaries they could use a shield from time to time. Perhaps even have special art work done on the front. I'm open to trying it without as the trailers look cool, but if they can add it in later great.

Ghost416
09-19-2018, 04:46 AM
Hoplite is derived from the Greek word Hoplomachus, which translates to "Equipment." Thus, the entire kit of the soldier, including the helmet, shield, greaves, sword, spear, etc.. The identifying of the hoplite as a specific type of soldier who fought in a specific manner is a modern invention.

Olympus2018
09-19-2018, 09:52 AM
Hoplite is derived from the Greek word Hoplomachus, which translates to "Equipment." Thus, the entire kit of the soldier, including the helmet, shield, greaves, sword, spear, etc.. The identifying of the hoplite as a specific type of soldier who fought in a specific manner is a modern invention.

Νο. Hoplite derives from oplitis (Οπλίτης) which means the one who bears arms, literally. The term is used both in ancient and modern Greek. The ancient Greek hoplite had standard equipment which varied from city-state to city-state.

NoVa_Erk
09-19-2018, 12:13 PM
you can implement them easily

the Mechanics are already in this game it is all very similar to origins. so hold LB to activate an Ability. ok why you dont make shields like Hold LB to Block. and you cant make all the abilities only 1-2 shield abilities like Shieldbash. with shields you are more slow and cant dodge as fast as possible and DPS is reduced because of speed. HOLD LB and press at the right moment LT to PArry is for Controllersettings all the SAME.

there are many mechanics you can do

1. you can make it like origins. make the Leonidas spear a Hidden Blade slot and give another slot for shields!

2. if the Weapons are iconed with this Spear yo ucan make a Weapon type with Shield Sword or Shield Spear
.
3. you can make Shields as an Equipment like Arrows and stuff. it has a duration like a consumable item. you can buy it .
it is able to pick them up from the ground or HOLD the ABILITY Button for taking shields from enemies and instead of Tossing against the face (because of HOLDING this ability BUTTON) he takes it for his self. you can unequip it and let it fall or throw it. it has a duration and can only block and Shieldbash for Parry. it makes him player slower .

i recommend the Origins system but in a DLC it should be added
sorry but there is no Excuse for removing them totally as an OPTION. it is nobody forced to take one or not. and this is not Versatile this is forcing to a playstyle.
even if you say it will be Implemented in Future updates i would be happy but i need a promise for it. and it would fit really well. would buy the Gold preorder
atm i STICK with Origins and wait for this Update!!



i mean ok we have some voices saying no but the option more is better than no option!

i mean i PLAYED ORIGINS yesterday nd never Turtled it makes no sense to turtle they bash your block or give you guard break and hit you bad. they can hit you from back and sides.
it is most times for the Arrows to block them and add them to my inventory. i get heavy attacks from enemies they hit my shields and damage me throught bcause of the RPG system and Strength of my shield!! it is NOTHING TURTLING or STUFF or OP. i dodge often and Block for some attacks and Parry them and keep me from Arrows and even the some special Arrow npcs can hit me and make damage through my block. i use every aspect

we are not at FOR HONOR here. i want the Option to get a Shield. you took the Wrong timeline to take them out. and the most it hurts to see that 90 Percent of enemies have shields and even Headhunters .
it makes no sense to say it gives more versatile? you can make it even with shields

please ubisoft. Think over it and ADD shields to this game!!! and i will buy it
if not i am SORRY. i removed already my gold edition preorder because of this unauthentific decision.

i hope you will think over it and make it real for us playerbase !!

https://www.change.org/p/ubisoft-bring-back-the-shield-for-assassins-creed-odyssey-2a473dd2-8a36-4944-b5ad-92c946c0611f

this is the PAGE for the Petition everybody can Sign it!! so important is it for us in this Timeline !!

NoVa_Erk
09-19-2018, 12:31 PM
they dont need to rework it. they can Add it into maybe as a new class. there are ways and a big petition out there because of this


https://www.change.org/p/ubisoft-bri...d-92c946c0611f

ermacos
09-19-2018, 12:52 PM
Hoplite is derived from the Greek word Hoplomachus, which translates to "Equipment." Thus, the entire kit of the soldier, including the helmet, shield, greaves, sword, spear, etc.. The identifying of the hoplite as a specific type of soldier who fought in a specific manner is a modern invention.

There is no such word hoplomachus or maybe you mean οπλομαχια - hoplomachia ( a battle between two or more people with weapons).
The world οπλομαχία - hoplomachia or monomachia (μονομαχία) is a word that given by the ancient Hellenics between 2 men with swords and heavy equipment. (this word gives the action between men and their equipment) but if you wish to say the today term "soldier" you say hoplite - οπλίτης.

NoVa_Erk
09-19-2018, 12:59 PM
the wide marked is to give options and they took the OPTION to use Sshields and watch the Enemies handle with them!! this is not versatile this is Forcing to play one playstyle. dodging attacking most of the time and sometimes parrying and then again DODGING. the most op thing is DODGING and not Blocking. blocking is well balanced. at least at Origins.

but to make more Money or get more Wide Market you have to give more Wide varieties to play defensive offensive or other stuff. hell if they put an OROCHI or Kensei Weapons like in Origins i would like the game !! it gives more versatile with Shields and not without. ok they put some ABILITIES and what then? give us the ABILITY to carry a Shield !! you even can use ABILITIES with shields though. lb is blocking and LT is while blocking the PARRY and WHILE BLOCK HOLDING HOLDING LT you make a Shield bash. bam you have it!! damn i am more a spartan or whatever MERC in Origins than here xD

NoVa_Erk
09-19-2018, 01:14 PM
"Copy of my original thread after getting directed here."

https://i0.wp.com/www.geekassassin.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ACOdyssey_AlexioswithShield.jpg

Tl DR This is a mega non-sensical bad design decision and this thread goes into detail why and furthermore why its super stupid especially considering the setting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDpI6Zzy-vo = THIS is what I love. What I wanted to replicate sorta in this game. And knowing THIS cannot happen, I'm gonna get real bloody mad now. So brace yourselves for a rage thread.

Before ANYONE says it. I KNOW the developer reply and I thoroughly disgree with it. I find it to be the most idiotic thing I've ever heard.
Quote from Jonathan Dumont = "Our gameplay is much more versatile than that of Origins and a shield was not suited to it," Absolute ********. You press like 2 buttons with 4 extra's in shape of powers chosen from skills. The End. Its absolute nonsense that the shield made no sense or was a hindrance.

I wanted to buy this game bad. I LOVE ancient greece. I wanted to buy the huge editions. enjoy all the DLC, play as a cool spartan. Enjoy good armor. have a good time with the new RPG elements.

And then.... here I am, browsing gameplay and checking out the introduction video = https://youtu.be/xOsIBcfBtJU?t=123

First Leonidas leaves the phalanx which is horribly dumb but hey. Video game. Okay then...

But then.... He throws his F'ing shield ???????????????
This had me thinking: " Wait a freaking minute.... why the HELL would he do that? WHAT?! Why ?! And I began thinking the UNTHINKABLE...

" Can he even use shields in this game?"

Googled it. AND TADA.... Nope we can't. WHAT THE F#CK ???????????

So what, Ubisoft? because we became a mercenary we forgot how to use shields? W'ere bloody spartans and somehow we just magically forgot how to hold a barrier infront of us.

"doesn't fit" you said in your reply to this. YOu added dodging, parrying.

I have a question. WHY NOT JUST ADD THAT....WITHOUT taking away the shield? Are you completely oblivious to how iconic the shield is to NOT JUST SPARTA.... but to Ancient Greece as a whole. Let alone how many of us wanted to use shields after Origins?

You say you bring in historians and all that fancy stuff when making your games. DID NONE OF THEM...tell you it would be a fundamentally mindnumbingly bad of an idea to remove the shield from our 2 spartan main leads?

And before anyone begins giving me crap for my language. I dont care. This is mega infuriating and stupid. I wanted to buy this game. I wanted to play and enjoy this game.
But I can't like this.

WHY THE F#CK... are you dumbing down your game? For zero ****ing valid reason other than " It wouldn't fit"... WTF does that even mean LOL....

let the PLAYER decide what fits since we'll be the ones playing in various ways. You enabled 3 different skill trees for combat. What?? You couldn't add a shield to that and just carry over how shields worked from origins???

I dont even know what else to say. This is the biggest WTF ... of 2018 for me so far. I'm currently playing Tomb Raider and enjoying the UPGRADES over Rise. And figured " hey. Maybe I'll try another female lead game with AC Oddysey. Cool spartan features and all"

Little did I f'ing know you'd just outright dumb down the combat and COMPLETELY STRIP a greek warrior of his/Her's ICONIC CHOICE OF ARMS = The Shield.

I mean jesus ****ing christ, Lead Designer. Did you even read the beginning dialog when Kassandra meets up with the spartan commander at the beach? He comments on her being a spartan and she replies with " Used to be or lie" And he replies by saying: YOU'RE ALWAYS A SPARTAN...ITS IN YOUR BLOOD!

Yet merc profession means no shields for you. WHAT????????!!!!!!! This decision is making my blood .... boil. How the hell can you think this is a good idea? FROM ANY PERSPECTIVE? removing what works is good??? Dumbing down is good? WHAT!

Rant over.

This is dumb. This is silly. This is bad from a historical POV. Horrible from a gameplay POV. FUNDAMENTALLY INEPT from a customizable POV considering Origins had this feature and you copied SO much from origins here so its zero issue.


Constructive criticism: BRING BACK THE SHIELD. Ditch this HORRIBLE line of thought. ADD TO YOUR GAME...do NOT STRIP IT OF FUNCTIONAL AND COOL FEATURES. That...is BAD game design.


FINAL THOUGHTS: Do you guys remember when the spartans faced off against the persians at Thermopylae 2500 years ago and when the Persian Commander yelled: "SPARTANS! DROP YOUR WEAPONS".... and the spartans then proceeded to drop their shields...

Yeah.... me neither.


Edit: I felt like adding this because I saw a greek guy comment on one of the videos showing Thermopylae: "
Hellas Defender
3 hours ago
My ancestors...but a Spartans would never leave his shield. It was a RULE. The women were saying to their men, when they were leaving for battle: You will return with it or on it. Which means that they will return winners with the shield or they will die for Sparta..."

A spartan, soldier or not, respected his / her's shield. It was baked in the culture. It was part of their heart and soul.

Ubisoft. Get a grip. This is a colossal mistake. ADD BACK THE SHIELD. Come on, Ubisoft...

Its as bad as removing the Katana from a Samurai.

https://pre00.deviantart.net/f83d/th/pre/i/2013/029/a/a/300___leonidas_by_wns_tomm-d5t5wkz.jpg

Give us our shields!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



i totally agree with that. i mean its not a hindering feature. it is not crossing any bad features. you have to hold LB and press A, B X or Y. so you have the same Controller settings like the LB block from Origins. the difference is you only can PArry with B and holding makes you a Shield bash!! thats it !! why its on your way? you can make while holding LB blocking pressing LT at Parry moment to parry instead of B. its a Tweak!! please it could be a DLC or later update but a Confirmation would be Awesome. then i would reorder this game till then i will stick with Origins!! there i can be more spartan or greece than alexios could give origins a DLC for it for Customization packs and its done !!

it can fit very well. some tweakings and new Abilities for shield on the Left hand insteaad of the Leonidas Spear and it would be great

NoVa_Erk
09-19-2018, 01:32 PM
"I say it again !
THIS IS NOT ****ING 300 CRAP !!

What Hollywood movies stuff to your head is not what Ubisoft will do !!
The post launch content is also been already determined .
Crap shields will not happen !!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just because you have a beef with the movie, or with Origins shields, doesn't mean shields are outright bad or useless or disliked generally. Origins archers were insane and annoying. The shield saved me countless times.

And btw, dude. you're travelling back to ancient greece. Where the shield was iconic. Symbolic. Precious and baked into the very culture.
Your anger makes 0 sense at all....

Shields should happen for 3 reasons.

Nr 1: Its the ancient world. Why not use a shield for defensive playstyles?
nr 2: blocking arrows from archers is a GOOD idea.
Nr 3: Looks cool.

BONUS Nr 4: Player customization / Player choice is good for ANY game. Origins understood that.
Arguing against this = Arguing in favour for downgrades and restrictions that make the game poorer.

And thats that. Nobody is forcing you to use shields. But many of us would like to. Like we did in origins.


yes, you want to do an RPG based game? than you must give us a more open Class option to use. i mean you even dont have a Multiplayer so this would give us more versatility instead of forcing me to hold with one handed weapons the spear on the left side. shields could make abilitie attacks, too. i even dont undersand you do the wrong if you want give the Versatility in Combat the totally opposite ubisoft !!

ProdiGurl
09-19-2018, 01:55 PM
t you make a Shield bash. bam you have it!! damn i am more a spartan or whatever MERC in Origins than here xD

Ok, but we have a Sparta kick that 'bashes' them off a cliff with your foot. I don't think that feature is really necessary in OD like it would be in Origins.

Ghost416
09-20-2018, 01:59 PM
Νο. Hoplite derives from oplitis (Οπλίτης) which means the one who bears arms, literally. The term is used both in ancient and modern Greek. The ancient Greek hoplite had standard equipment which varied from city-state to city-state.

There is no such word hoplomachus or maybe you mean οπλομαχια - hoplomachia ( a battle between two or more people with weapons).
The world οπλομαχία - hoplomachia or monomachia (μονομαχία) is a word that given by the ancient Hellenics between 2 men with swords and heavy equipment. (this word gives the action between men and their equipment) but if you wish to say the today term "soldier" you say hoplite - οπλίτης.
I thought it came from Hoplomachus. That's what the historians for the Europa Barbarorum mod for Rome: Total War always said back when I frequented their community. I appreciate you both correcting me. :) What you guys are saying just reinforces the argument for shields to be an option, though. Alexios/Kassandra may be a mercenary, but as a mercenary, they bear arms in combat and the shield is a weapon no different from a spear or sword. And with the way Greeks fought in a phalanx, it's arguably the most important weapon. Yes, there are no phalanx mechanics in the game, which is a profound shame as it could have been a very interesting and unique gameplay feature, but the aim here with Odyssey is to immerse us in the world and culture ancient of Greece in the 5th century BC and leaving out something that's quintessentially Greek is only going to hurt that immersion.

bbucha
09-28-2018, 04:33 PM
Sorry for beeing little late to the party...
I would like to talk openly about this topic without trying to pay homage to certain individuals or trying to smear honey around bums.

Here is my thought :
have to admit - the choice to remove the shield from the players arsenal is pretty dumb... especially when it comes to that time period.
A merceneary in that time period was equipped with a shield, their excuse for not adding a optional one is either mini transactions (to buy one later) or pure lazyness... sorry but that is how i feel about it.
Origins had one shield size, fans including myself begged for a tall tower shield, that NPC´s or Phylakes had for example, only to get dissapointed- What was the main reason not to provide one?
Was it because a bigger shield would've required character (ragdoll) adjustment? Or to much work?
For this title assets from Origins have clearly been used, which would've left room or more than enough time to implement the small shield and a big one as optional fighting styles for people.
Saying you wanted a more versitile feel is just bogus
The Ironic or paradox thing in this whole argument is that you give the player mutiple choice scenarios but strip them of the shield, This may make SENSE in Québec mind, but is in my humble opinion simply contradictory... or in otherwords dumb.
If i were in your shoes i would've taken a day off, to realy think about this, in the end i would prolly smacked myself in the face for even thinking about removing a fighting option, which was clearly enjoed and welcomed by a lot of players in Origins.
You either provide mutiple choice or you don't,
In my opinion the shield is more important to my main experience in the game, than a yes or no choice now and then.. even if it has an impact on later gameplay...

By taking the shield from the player you remove options for a different gameplay choice the player could take...
I seriously hope you reconsider readding the shield, im not sure if the game will also have arenas like orgin had, but if it does give players a shield for that at least.
One more aspect to have a shield in this title , it would simply fit the theme very well.
And im sure many here had Leonidas in mind when they bought the game, dont rob them and me from that experience. This is a mature joke hope you can take it (Otherwise xerxes shall be in the shower with you waiting for you to drop the soap) kidding still love yall
One last thing about the shield, even a versitile fighter would not stand a very good chance against an opponent with one.
All this makes me pretty certain that this decision will backfire, and ultimately render the game less fun than its predecessor. Oh and before you say ohh we have boats n ships now... meh dont care the topic is shield-s. Add them and make players happy for once... Thank you...


PS: i just found out that there will be no shield... If i knew this before i would've not preordered ! You tricked me once again... Please go and make a twitter anouncement that there will be no shield in this game i think plenty poeple are under the impression that there will be one. This literally screams for memes...

AnimusLover
09-28-2018, 05:21 PM
I've avoided this thread for so long because i honestly think the complaint is ridiculous.

No, they shouldn't. The combat has been designed in a way that works without it. If they added it they'd probably have to rework the entire skill tree. I really hope Quebec cdoesn't buckle to pressure. They didn't with Syndicate and hood toggle so they shouldn't now.

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 05:44 PM
Sorry for beeing little late to the party...
I would like to talk openly about this topic without trying to pay homage to certain individuals or trying to smear honey around bums.

Here is my thought :
have to admit - the choice to remove the shield from the players arsenal is pretty dumb... especially when it comes to that time period.
A merceneary in that time period was equipped with a shield, their excuse for not adding a optional one is either mini transactions (to buy one later) or pure lazyness... sorry but that is how i feel about it.
Origins had one shield size, fans including myself begged for a tall tower shield, that NPC´s or Phylakes had for example, only to get dissapointed- What was the main reason not to provide one?
Was it because a bigger shield would've required character (ragdoll) adjustment? Or to much work?
For this title assets from Origins have clearly been used, which would've left room or more than enough time to implement the small shield and a big one as optional fighting styles for people.
Saying you wanted a more versitile feel is just bogus
The Ironic or paradox thing in this whole argument is that you give the player mutiple choice scenarios but strip them of the shield, This may make SENSE in Québec mind, but is in my humble opinion simply contradictory... or in otherwords dumb.
If i were in your shoes i would've taken a day off, to realy think about this, in the end i would prolly smacked myself in the face for even thinking about removing a fighting option, which was clearly enjoed and welcomed by a lot of players in Origins.
You either provide mutiple choice or you don't,
In my opinion the shield is more important to my main experience in the game, than a yes or no choice now and then.. even if it has an impact on later gameplay...

By taking the shield from the player you remove options for a different gameplay choice the player could take...
I seriously hope you reconsider readding the shield, im not sure if the game will also have arenas like orgin had, but if it does give players a shield for that at least.
One more aspect to have a shield in this title , it would simply fit the theme very well.
And im sure many here had Leonidas in mind when they bought the game, dont rob them and me from that experience. This is a mature joke hope you can take it (Otherwise xerxes shall be in the shower with you waiting for you to drop the soap) kidding still love yall
One last thing about the shield, even a versitile fighter would not stand a very good chance against an opponent with one.
All this makes me pretty certain that this decision will backfire, and ultimately render the game less fun than its predecessor. Oh and before you say ohh we have boats n ships now... meh dont care the topic is shield-s. Add them and make players happy for once... Thank you...


PS: i just found out that there will be no shield... If i knew this before i would've not preordered ! You tricked me once again... Please go and make a twitter anouncement that there will be no shield in this game i think plenty poeple are under the impression that there will be one. This literally screams for memes...
They "tricked you" bcuz you didn't know Shields weren't used? In looking at all the gameplay vids & images of the game, neither are carrying or fighting with a shield and where comments are possible in publications, webpages, it's sometimes mentioned there.
The burden is on US to due our research on a game before we pre-order to make an informed decision - they aren't going to be making announcements about what the game doesn't have.

Obviously we will stand a very good chance without a shield or we wouldn't be playing any game at all if Ubi created it to be nearly impossible to fight w/out one.
But we have a POE broken spear and Sparta Kick instead.

Lastly, just becuz Ubi's new direction is offering choices to players, it seems people are deciding that absolutely everything and every part of the game has to be offered as a choice or else they aren't offering ANY choice to us at all & it's not fair, etc. etc.
They have to make some decisions in framework of the game. Not everything is customizable so that we get everything we want & like.
It's just unrealistic.

I'm fine with your opinions, but some of this is just unfair imo

(and I can't believe I agreed w/ AnimusLovers post up there - but he's right - esp. this late stage of the game.
I'm fine with or without shields - but it's gotten obnoxious)

datAssassin2018
09-28-2018, 06:14 PM
I've avoided this thread for so long because i honestly think the complaint is ridiculous.

No, they shouldn't. The combat has been designed in a way that works without it. If they added it they'd probably have to rework the entire skill tree. I really hope Quebec cdoesn't buckle to pressure. They didn't with Syndicate and hood toggle so they shouldn't now.

You find it ridiculous? The only think I find ridiculous is that the Greek hero and most of his enemies don't carry a shield in this game.
As for your comment, it's invalid. They don't have to rework anything. You can use other weapons in the game that aren't in the skill tree.
Don't worry though you can rejoice. They won't add it that's certain.

bbucha
09-28-2018, 06:34 PM
Well the game is based upon origins as said the assets are from origins, so why would i think that the game would not include shields especially if that was the thing that stood out in origins???
I did not look at any footage before hand because i didnt want to spoil anything i simply assumed it would be an origin playing in ancient greek 430 something BC.
It simply makes no sense to have a mercenary or Spartan as they title the protagonist themselves, to have no shield. That would be shamefull
http://www.thewarriorsofgreece.com/facts.html FACTS

Historically speaking and fitting to that theme, it makes literally no sense to fully remove it instead of leaving it optional...

And yes therefore i have been tricked into believing of playing a Spartan or Mercenary, what im actually playing is someone ludicrous that goes into battle without one.
I mean look at this..
or this https://i.redd.it/zi3bxvd2zt311.jpg https://i.redd.it/bl9uvk38zt311.jpg https://i.redd.it/jq8ll2x9zt311.jpg
Aka to cool for shield...Outlaw , btw i did not make these, but i think its hilarious, and on point.

They literally left everything in there but the shield... you are blocking something that could've been optional and improved upon from origins, so people as you would not have to use it at all, but more casual players like me could've used it.
Matter of choice... You seem to defend their stance that is completly illogical... especially in this title...
Take a look at the 2nd screenshot it represents a similar logical lifechoice as the statement not to have one (again optional) in a battle like that.

I mean you are entitled to your opinion and i know tastes differ but nothing what i said here is unfair.
You seem to be under the impression that it is not for the players to decide how a game should be, but you are wrong because that is exactly how it should be.
Afterall you are given so many options be female or Male multiple armor types, skins, horses or ridables multiple weapons: bows hammers blunts daggers swords the choice to decide what to do with a npc, life and death what kind of boat to ride, choices so many of them but no optional shield...? common.
Therefore the term lazyness seems pretty fitting and to call that unfair is equal to that cop out statement to have a versitile protagonist therefore no shield.

And if i understood this correctly you played Origins from release, well no, i know you played it from the release , but until now???
Well i guess the shield then becomes strange... but that is prolly due to overplaying a game with an max stat overpowered bajek rather than having a simple white shield.Or not ?

AnimusLover
09-28-2018, 06:44 PM
You find it ridiculous? The only think I find ridiculous is that the Greek hero and most of his enemies don't carry a shield in this game.

There are shields in the game, it's just that not every enemy has it so there's some variation in the combat. If every enemy had a shield then you'd be fighting them all the same way.


As for your comment, it's invalid. They don't have to rework anything. You can use other weapons in the game that aren't in the skill tree.

Like what? The weapons have been made with the skill tree in mind whether it's heavy, light, one-handed, two-handed, dual wielding, long, short so it's all applicable.
The devs said they removed the shields because they realised people were turtling i.e. hiding behind the shield. Without them it's a test of real skill because you have to parry and dodge so that relies on timing.

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 06:47 PM
@ bbucha, WHO'S HOLDING THOSE SHIELDS? Not you, the player.

Lysette88
09-28-2018, 07:36 PM
I personally did not use the shield much in close combat - but I found it useful to shield myself from incoming arrows while closing the gap to the opponent. Otherwise, when close by, I am using fast blades in a hit and dodge tactic - get a few hits in and dodge out of range. This works fine against opponents with slower more powerful weapons. I am just curious how I can defend from arrows now whilst gap closing?

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 07:51 PM
I personally did not use the shield much in close combat - but I found it useful to shield myself from incoming arrows while closing the gap to the opponent. Otherwise, when close by, I am using fast blades in a hit and dodge tactic - get a few hits in and dodge out of range. This works fine against opponents with slower more powerful weapons. I am just curious how I can defend from arrows now whilst gap closing?
Ya, Aya had Blades and didn't use a Shield. I thought it was easier to fight that way than with a shield.
I liked blades even tho my main favorite weapon was a cursed Kopesh (?) I got from a side mission.

Lysette88
09-28-2018, 07:59 PM
Ya, Aya had Blades and didn't use a Shield. I thought it was easier to fight that way than with a shield.
I liked blades even tho my main favorite weapon was a cursed Kopesh (?) I got from a side mission.

The problem with just blades is appearing when you have to fight in close quarters with no much room to "dance" around your opponent - then a shield is worth a lot.

Lysette88
09-28-2018, 08:01 PM
And not having a shield with some fire protection can be very unpleasant when fighting an opponent with "on fire" on his weapon as well.

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 08:03 PM
I always used a fire protective shields - later in the game those guards are shooting fire arrows at you

Lysette88
09-28-2018, 08:14 PM
I always used a fire protective shields - later in the game those guards are shooting fire arrows at you

Yeah, me too, I am traumatized by opponents with "on fire" weapons well enough. I myself never use them, because I have set myself on fire with them too often - due to that I am too close to my opponent with my fighting style.

datAssassin2018
09-28-2018, 08:18 PM
There are shields in the game, it's just that not every enemy has it so there's some variation in the combat. If every enemy had a shield then you'd be fighting them all the same way.



Like what? The weapons have been made with the skill tree in mind whether it's heavy, light, one-handed, two-handed, dual wielding, long, short so it's all applicable.
The devs said they removed the shields because they realised people were turtling i.e. hiding behind the shield. Without them it's a test of real skill because you have to parry and dodge so that relies on timing.

I never said that there are no shields. Look at a those beach battles. At least 50% if not less of the enemies don't carry a shield and the battle is just a mob fest. Many guards carry a sword or an axe but no shield. This isn't a realistic representation of ancient Greek combat and weaponry.Only archers, slingers and horsemen didn't carry a shield in ancient Greece.Peltasts and hoplites carried a shield and these two made the bulk of the armies back then. I wouldn't be pissed so much about the enemies IF I could at the very least use a shield but it turns out I can't.

The skill tree gives some bonus to /damage/armor.It has nothing to do with what weapons are in the game.
The devs are just arrogant and they didn't know how to make this game.They removed something that some people liked and they force us to play in their own way. If they realized people were turtling, they could add heavy attacks that break our guard.

They bragged that they consulted historians but the game seems way far from real history:

-There is a female protagonist(cannon too) that behaves like a man(she has a manly job too) and everyone treats her normally

-The combat and weapons are inaccurate(I'm not talking about the magical spear)

-Some important enemy classes are missing(peltasts/javelineers, slingers)

-The map is inaccurate and many places are in different positions

-Mt Olympus isn't included

-Thessaly is missing

-Famous Greek cities in Asia Minor aren't included(Miletus, Halicarnassus, Ephesus)

-The Thracian coastline where the Athenians had built many colonies isn't included

-The Macedonian capital is missing(Aigai)

-Rhodes is missing

This game is a mess...

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 08:19 PM
LoL ya me too. Set my poor horses on fire too. I mainly used them while fighting on horseback but I did use them other times.
Usually just a swipe or 2 to set them on fire for damage then switch back to my kopesh

bbucha
09-28-2018, 09:19 PM
Not even sure how to interpret that comment at this point...
I dont care which NPC holds the shield, i just want to be able to use one, be it while stealing it from an NPC without immediatly throwing it away like garbage, or included as main arsenal.same as the majority in this thread, which voted for one...
That selfish behaviour about being a super pro at the game, dodging your way through hordes of NPCs in a larger battle just shows how utterly bound you are to previous titles ... lets face it most people enjoyed the playstyle of origins, over past titles , in which you simply pressed a button to dodge or parry everything. Only a bunch of hardcore players that unlocked every type of weapon, upgraded their skilltree + 10 or beyond in origins due to time or whatever, may think that a shield isnt a necessity in a game like this. And some stealth only players... but we had this type of gameplay in origins, people loved it so it makes no sense to simply exclude it in this one where it would fit more than perfectly.
Furthermore there was no argument against the points i had provided that a spartan or mercanary indeed had a shield in that time period ... and that this shield was crucial for them, so what should i say towards your short argument about a "player" holding a shield vice versa having none as protagonist to choose from... which gets clearly advertised by Ubisoft as playing a spartan or mercenary? In my eyes the protagonist is a simple farmer that suffers from the leeroy jenkins syndrome, blindly charging into battle without any protection other than his armor. ( a farmer god so to speak, far away from any realistic scenario, a chance of survival would be utterly slim... yet some seem to find it compelling to be clark kent aka superman on greek battlefield getting hit mutiple times without dying.
I leave it at that, i think we simply wont find even grounds and we wont settle for an optional shield...despite what i say...what i dont get is, why you decied tp stand against it, while it would be an "optional" thing.
However my point still stands in the room for mods to come by and with a little luck listen to the majority of outcries, carry it on to the devs that actually are in charge and ultimately decied what happens to the game, a game that is already standing on sinking ground with its potential due to this small but important fact... just take a look at the tube and you will realize that there are plenty of people that demand one especially for this title. Have a good night

ProdiGurl
09-28-2018, 09:41 PM
Not even sure how to interpret that comment at this point...
I dont care which NPC holds the shield, i just want to be able to use one,
It was to point out that Ubi isn't purposely 'tricking' people like you had accused. There are shields in the game but there is no gameplay footage or images that show us using one anywhere. They are in the game, just not any we use.

I understand the opinions (and empathize some), I don't understand the obsession about it but like I have said other times, the minute people can't have something in a game, it will be the one thing they'll obsess on to have. Human nature.

pooter1111
09-28-2018, 11:43 PM
No on shields

Lysette88
09-29-2018, 12:03 AM
As far as I have seen the overpower move with the spear seems to be automatic and always to be a hit - this is as well different to how overpower worked in Origins - you basically have no agency once you invoke that move, it is kind of an auto-attack, which your character performs without you doing anything really - at least it looks to me like that, because it is always the same kind of animation with it. And it seems to get around a shield of the opponent. Kind of a theatrical move and not something you have to do yourself (beside pressing the correct button).

Olympus2018
09-29-2018, 09:19 AM
I never said that there are no shields. Look at a those beach battles. At least 50% if not less of the enemies don't carry a shield and the battle is just a mob fest. Many guards carry a sword or an axe but no shield. This isn't a realistic representation of ancient Greek combat and weaponry.Only archers, slingers and horsemen didn't carry a shield in ancient Greece.Peltasts and hoplites carried a shield and these two made the bulk of the armies back then. I wouldn't be pissed so much about the enemies IF I could at the very least use a shield but it turns out I can't.

The skill tree gives some bonus to /damage/armor.It has nothing to do with what weapons are in the game.
The devs are just arrogant and they didn't know how to make this game.They removed something that some people liked and they force us to play in their own way. If they realized people were turtling, they could add heavy attacks that break our guard.

They bragged that they consulted historians but the game seems way far from real history:

-There is a female protagonist(cannon too) that behaves like a man(she has a manly job too) and everyone treats her normally

-The combat and weapons are inaccurate(I'm not talking about the magical spear)

-Some important enemy classes are missing(peltasts/javelineers, slingers)

-The map is inaccurate and many places are in different positions

-Mt Olympus isn't included

-Thessaly is missing

-Famous Greek cities in Asia Minor aren't included(Miletus, Halicarnassus, Ephesus)

-The Thracian coastline where the Athenians had built many colonies isn't included

-The Macedonian capital is missing(Aigai)

-Rhodes is missing

This game is a mess...

Look at the bright side. Most major ancient cities are included. The reconstruction of the Parthenon and the rest of Athens seems pretty accurate. How do you know Olympus is missing? Have you roamed around the map already? In most battles, everyone carries a shield except you. Especially in naval battles, 99% of NPCs carry a shield. No slingshots on sight, that is true. Peltasts? Maybe we have not seen them yet.

The map of Greece is not a proper map, just an artistic depiction of Greece. Many islands are misplaced too. Asia Minor, Magna Grecia, Cyprus and the rest of the ancient Greek world (Black Sea, South France, colonies in Spain, Egypt and the Levant) are also missing. This is not a perfect game. Then again, Ubisoft did not intend to reconstruct the entire ancient Greek world from Gibraltar (Hercules' Pillars) to Hydaspes river, near India. This game was based on the Peloponnesian War. Maybe in the future, Ubisoft will make a proper game about ancient Greece.

bbucha
09-30-2018, 08:42 AM
were almost at 67%
Jonathan Dumont... will we see any feedback about this?

Lysette88
09-30-2018, 08:52 AM
One thing I can think of why there are not shields for us is the game mechanic with adrenaline required to use abilities. Those require hits on an opponent, so the fighting style has to be more aggressive in order to use abilities. higher level enemies will use these abilities as well, so we would eventually be at a disadvantage, if we fight more defensively than aggressively. And we might need that adrenaline to to build up quickly, in order to remove the shield from an opponent. Overall I think this game is far more combat oriented than we are used to as assassins and combat mechanics enforce this new style.

bbucha
09-30-2018, 09:20 AM
Im in doubt, that sugarcoating ****ty decisions will ultimately move fans of this poll to swallow it up.
If the shiled would be in the game (as it should be according to 67% of this poll) and you would find yourself in the situation of facing an enemy having one that you need to remove, you would simply switch to another fighting style to execute your adrenalin move. (shield goes to inventory)
Problem solved...
The whole shield fighting system is already existing reimplementation should be easy if not seemless since this is Origins with the title Odyssey,

playker
09-30-2018, 12:45 PM
We want shields!

BogPeasant420
10-01-2018, 01:18 PM
Absolutely! I've seen accounts of warriors wielding a spear in one hand, shield in the other thus it stands to reason that the protag should be able to use a shield. I'd actually prefer to see daggers come back, as they were my favorite weapon type.

Krayzen
10-01-2018, 11:05 PM
No shields is honestly the reason I'm going to pass on this game. Maybe developers should start giving players options instead of telling players how they should play the game.

Ravenubi1991
10-02-2018, 02:42 PM
Yup, man. I really wanna try it. I'd love to try the new RPG features and finally play as a female character without being interrupted like in Syndicate.
But playing in this setting, fully armored, hoplite chestplate, hoplite helmet, using leonidas's spear even... and unable to use a shield is in indescribably large bummer.

I hope Ubisoft listens. Its such a small yet huge thing at the same time.
Such a bad design move that causes so much "Meh" for absolutely no reason.

Please listen, Ubisoft. And give us shields.
Want more money? Put in shields. That simple.

RHYLASS
10-02-2018, 03:46 PM
Playing the darn thing right now and hell do I love it! Great Game. We need shields!

Ravenubi1991
10-03-2018, 11:26 PM
I'm not letting this thread die. Not for as long as I can.

Ubisoft. Dumont, please for the LOVE of god add shields.
I dont care if it takes 1 or 3 or 4 months. AT least make it happen and tell us when no matter how long.

This game looks god damn good. I love the story so far from youtube playthroughs and I'd love to play this, get the badass hoplite armor sets and smash people with a spear and shield.

I really want to play this. I really want to support this direction you're going. But I can't... because of this absolutely backwards minded decision to remove shields.

I just can't get myself to pay or play it. I can't even get myself to pirate your game either when that option becomes available because its not about the money. Its about the fact that every second playing this. Seeing other soldiers, being reminded that Im a spartan, seeing my spartan family in flashbacks... ALL OF IT reminds me of a badass shield.

That I can never get. And it SUCKS, ubisoft. It feels like you're slapping us across the face. Teasing us with a damn cool feature that has NEVER been more appropriate.

In Egypt we had the egyptian sword that befit bayak perfectly.
In AC 2 we had the wonderful rennaisance cloaks that added such an elegant look to Ezio. Let alone charm
in AC 3 we had the Tomahawk axe for Connor. A remnant of his native heritage.

List goes on. The spear of Leonidas is a nice feature but the spear is not the key factor in ancient greek warfare. The Shield was was EVERY BIT...as important. 100 % synergy between the two.

And it feels weird and really bad not being able to use one. To the extent I just can't at all play this game that I really want to.

Your needless design decision is killing my option to play your game, Dumont. A decision that doesn't at all make ANY remote sense. And doesn't at all impact people that didn't use shields.
It just screws those of us who really wanted to.


ESPECIALLY in this historical setting. I mean jesus... There are a billion reasons of why to add shields and absolutely zero not to other than " I dont care" which is an invalid reason because its optional. 100 % optional.

Please re-think this decision, Ubisoft.

Because I'd hate to one day go to Japan in this franchise and then get told " Hey. yeah you can't use a Katana because some obscure, weird reason"

Just imagining that scenario in a few years is enough to make my blood boil.

circasomnia
10-03-2018, 11:44 PM
It's not authentic because Greeks and warriors of that time period had access to shields. Your artists even painted pictures of warriors using shields for this very game.

Sadly this bothers me enough to not buy this game on release. I'll probably still buy it when it goes on sale or something though, just because I love Greek things.

kennethdiebold
10-04-2018, 01:04 PM
Yes to shields. If they can add support for shields that would be welcome.

ZodiacChiller
10-04-2018, 01:12 PM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

Absolutely I'd love to have a shield

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 01:30 PM
I prefer without shields, I never used shields in origins and like daggers and you normally can't use daggers and shields combined anyway, you forced to fight like a true spartan and that with swift dodging and fast strikes I use the parry system all the time so just get sue to that.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 01:52 PM
A "true" Spartan fought with Dory spears and shields. I can't understand why Ubisoft has such a hard on for non-passive combat. Everyone defends themselves, otherwise we'd all be dead.It only takes a nick on your leg or a slash across your torso to kill you, in that era. Infections and whatnot.

"Suicidal recklesness, berserkery, and rage were prohibited in a Spartan army, as these behaviors endangered the phalanx. Recklessness could lead to dishonor, as in the case of Aristodemus".

You wanna be a true Spartan? Grab a shield buddy, because you wouldn't be one if you charged in, spears blazing.

silvermercy
10-04-2018, 01:57 PM
I'd love to see optional shields. For a Spartan especially it was shameful to lose it, probably because it's the first thing to discard if you abandoned the battle and coming home without it was considered the mark of a deserter. Spartan mothers gave the shield to the sons saying the famous quote "with this or on it".

Having said that, I'm not sure Alexios/Kass are Spartan citizens. To become a Spartan citizen and be part of the army and have a shield you'd have to be male and have completed the 'agoge' training usually completed by the age of 30 if I'm not mistaken.

larrykop1967
10-04-2018, 01:59 PM
Although i didn't really use shields in ACO, i found them to be, not much use to be honest, i think for historical accuracy and choice they should add shield's

a_ustinl
10-04-2018, 02:01 PM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

I Agree. I can’t even discribe in words how disappointed I am in this game because of the ignorance and/or carelessness of the development team for ignoring the importance of shields and phalanxes in hoplite warfare. I started playing the game and realized there was nothing remotely characteristic of ancient Spartan or Greek warfare in the gameplay. I was so eager and interested to see how Ubisoft would incorporate the Greek style of warfare into the game. If it is going to continue to be just rolling around like an idiot through a scatter of individuals fighting without phalanxes or the use of shields, then I want my money back. What a fraud and a waste. Why did they set the game in this time period if they were just going to recklessly and carelessly ignore the historical details that truly would have made this game unique? I’m sorry, “fluidness” is not an excuse for completely ignoring historical context, as that is the primary reason why we play Assassin’s Creed. I can’t play this nonsense anymore knowing I’m constantly going to be disappointed by the lack of effort by Ubisoft to try to immerse players into a story of the time. Sweet, the scenery is cool...if I wanted that I would’ve bought a painting. Ugh, total waste of money.

ProdiGurl
10-04-2018, 02:02 PM
I'd love to see optional shields. For a Spartan especially it was shameful to lose it, probably because it's the first thing to discard if you abandoned the battle and coming home without it was considered the mark of a deserter. Spartan mothers gave the shield to the sons saying the famous quote "with this or on it".

Having said that, I'm not sure Alexios/Kass are Spartan citizens. To become a Spartan citizen and be part of the army and have a shield you'd have to be male and have completed the 'agoge' training usually completed by the age of 30.
Well that's an interesting point for the people who are holding tight to how important 'history" is as far as warfare goes. Did women even fight in battles?
I honestly don't want them since we already had them in Origins but I'm open to them being brought in. I just don't see it as any game breaker. Combat kicking my butt on easy level could be more of gamebreaker for me lol.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 02:09 PM
Combat wouldn't kick you in the butt on easy if the combat was as it should be. If we want to play a combo oriented disappointment, we can all flock to Shadow of War/Mordor. But we came here for an AC game, which are critically acclaimed for historical accuracy. But, there is none here? Hoplites aplenty, yet our ex-Spartan can't wield a shield? I'm sorry, but Ubisoft dropped the ball on this one.

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 02:39 PM
A "true" Spartan fought with Dory spears and shields. I can't understand why Ubisoft has such a hard on for non-passive combat. Everyone defends themselves, otherwise we'd all be dead.It only takes a nick on your leg or a slash across your torso to kill you, in that era. Infections and whatnot.

"Suicidal recklesness, berserkery, and rage were prohibited in a Spartan army, as these behaviors endangered the phalanx. Recklessness could lead to dishonor, as in the case of Aristodemus".

You wanna be a true Spartan? Grab a shield buddy, because you wouldn't be one if you charged in, spears blazing.



this game is hardly based on realism, and when I said true spate I didn't mean literally what once upon a time a spartan was like, I meant my perception of being this unstoppable, fearing, crazy spartan who has lightening fast reflexes and is the strongest warrior of the land its all fictional but our imagination of a spartan is what I just mentioned and I don't want to cower behind a shield the game it too fast paced for that.

ProdiGurl
10-04-2018, 02:40 PM
I can't play till it releases tomorrow, so it hasn't kicked my butt on Easy level


and I don't want to cower behind a shield the game it too fast paced for that.
Agree

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 02:43 PM
this game is hardly based on realism, and when I said true spate I didn't mean literally what once upon a time a spartan was like, I meant my perception of being this unstoppable, fearing, crazy spartan who has lightening fast reflexes and is the strongest warrior of the land its all fictional but our imagination of a spartan is what I just mentioned and I don't want to cower behind a shield the game it too fast paced for that.

So you want to be a Demi-God? Go play God of War. This is Assassin's Creed, not God of War's Creed.

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 02:47 PM
So you want to be a Demi-God? Go play God of War. This is Assassin's Creed, not God of War's Creed.

but are we not playing a character that is super powerful with god like ability and lightening fast reflexes? so what you are saying is this game is more like god of war than AC? I'm extremely happy with the game and how it plays which is what I meant by my post. Alexios and Alexandrea are not meant to be peasants they play like gods which was my point

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 02:51 PM
They have an artifact that gives them the abilities from the skill tree. As individuals, they are not even close to being a Demi-God, let alone a God. They can die in one hit, they take a long time to kill someone. Regardless of this fact, they *were* an average Spartan thus they deserve the right to *optionally* use a shield.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 02:58 PM
but are we not playing a character that is super powerful with god like ability and lightening fast reflexes? so what you are saying is this game is more like god of war than AC? I'm extremely happy with the game and how it plays which is what I meant by my post. Alexios and Alexandrea are not meant to be peasants they play like gods which was my point

I actually stated the polar opposite. You want this to be God of War, but it is not. It is Assassin's Creed. Each protagonist has never been a God, they only used the PoE to achieve their goals. Our current Protags are humans, squishy, flawed, humans who have an artifact they use to assassinate their enemies with and to aid them with more precision and some supernatural stuff. They're not Demi-Gods so if you want to be ridiculously OP, Kratos is your man.

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 02:58 PM
They have an artifact that gives them the abilities from the skill tree. As individuals, they are not even close to being a Demi-God, let alone a God. They can die in one hit, they take a long time to kill someone. Regardless of this fact, they *were* an average Spartan thus they deserve the right to *optionally* use a shield.

maybe so but this game is not realistic and shield or no shield im still having a great time 'pretending to be a god'

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 03:01 PM
I actually stated the polar opposite. You want this to be God of War, but it is not. It is Assassin's Creed. Each protagonist has never been a God, they only used the PoE to achieve their goals. Our current Protags are humans, squishy, flawed, humans who have an artifact they use to assassinate their enemies with and to aid them with more precision and some supernatural stuff. They're not Demi-Gods so if you want to be ridiculously OP, Kratos is your man.

ive never played of god of war so I don't know what its like. I'm not even sure what a Demi god is as well lol to be honest my current build in this game is ridiculously OP.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 03:03 PM
maybe so but this game is not realistic and shield or no shield im still having a great time 'pretending to be a god'

And that's great dude, that's the point of gaming: to have fun. However, we're asking for options. **** you can turn on and off. Keep doing what you're doing buddy, because we should all have the option to play defensively or not.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 03:05 PM
Demi-Gods are half human, half God.

Achilles,Heracles, Perseus to name a few.

Olympus2018
10-04-2018, 03:06 PM
Not only they won't add shields as an option for Kassandra / Alexios but also forced enemy level scaling will remain ON forever. You are wasting your time with complaints....

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 03:08 PM
If 89 percent of us don't "complain", nothing will change. Games of the past may have shipped and sold as they were, but this is 2018. Games evolve now. With the help of the internet, games can keep players' interests with dailies, weeklies, monthly installments and more. Change keeps these games alive.

So yeah, we will continue to push for change, whether it be for options or for the removal of microtransactions. Whatever you want changed is yours to discuss, which is why we want shields yo

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 03:10 PM
That's what these forums are for, to discuss future feature implementations.

I'm sure all of us want Odyssey to have a long game life (I sure do), but it won't last if new things aren't implemented. NG+ is a classic example of what I'm trying to explain to you. It's a future implementation that saves a lot of RPGs and keeps players' interests.

Olympus2018
10-04-2018, 03:11 PM
And silencing all of us (89 percent of the players who agree with me) will allow Ubisoft to do whatever they want. We are pushing for Options, not for a rework of the ******* game jfc.

I am not sure if what we are asking for, can be done at this stage.

BogPeasant420
10-04-2018, 03:19 PM
Then let's hope the end-game has enough content to keep us entertained. And shields. I hope we get shields. Shields are nice, they keep us alive and ensure our good health/wellbeing

DrinkinMehStella
10-04-2018, 03:30 PM
That's what these forums are for, to discuss future feature implementations.

I'm sure all of us want Odyssey to have a long game life (I sure do), but it won't last if new things aren't implemented. NG+ is a classic example of what I'm trying to explain to you. It's a future implementation that saves a lot of RPGs and keeps players' interests.

yes you are right to mention an issues you have and that is the point of a forum, somethings though they just wont change but it would be nice for a mod to mention whether they could add this or not. it wont affect us to have that these options and it wont affect me to have sheilds or not I just wont use it personally.

Dtheawesome9010
10-04-2018, 03:32 PM
Yes shields in this game needs to be an option we can have a shield to equip or we can take it off and just go no shield but the accuracy in this game is pretty much screaming for shield usage. I know some people hate the shields but this is why it should be optional like a slot we can have full or leave empty and tell me that having one of those big badass beautiful spartan shields wouldn't be a dream come true. I for sure think so god damn that would be gorgeous. I swear ubisoft needs to listen to us about this add it in an update a early update maybe not a patch update but still add it for free rather than make us pay for it you greedy micro transactions.

a_ustinl
10-04-2018, 05:11 PM
A "true" Spartan fought with Dory spears and shields. I can't understand why Ubisoft has such a hard on for non-passive combat. Everyone defends themselves, otherwise we'd all be dead.It only takes a nick on your leg or a slash across your torso to kill you, in that era. Infections and whatnot.

"Suicidal recklesness, berserkery, and rage were prohibited in a Spartan army, as these behaviors endangered the phalanx. Recklessness could lead to dishonor, as in the case of Aristodemus".

You wanna be a true Spartan? Grab a shield buddy, because you wouldn't be one if you charged in, spears blazing.



What is the purpose of the AC series if not trying to take you back and immerse you in a certain time period?

Hoplon shields and phalanxes would not slow the game down, instead it would offer a completely unique experience for the completely unique style of warfare during that time. The current gameplay is so tedious and dumb because of Ubisoft’s complete disregard for the slightest bit realism. At least give us the option. I despise rolling around like an idiot amongst scattered hoplites that aren’t even fighting in a formation.

I know there are no refunds, but I’ve been on the phone all day with Microsoft trying to get my money back.

Sweet, the scenery in the game regarding ancient Greece is pretty...but if I wanted only that I would’ve bought a freakin’ painting.

a_ustinl
10-04-2018, 05:14 PM
this game is hardly based on realism, and when I said true spate I didn't mean literally what once upon a time a spartan was like, I meant my perception of being this unstoppable, fearing, crazy spartan who has lightening fast reflexes and is the strongest warrior of the land its all fictional but our imagination of a spartan is what I just mentioned and I don't want to cower behind a shield the game it too fast paced for that.

What is the purpose of the AC series if not trying to take you back and immerse you in a certain time period?

Hoplon shields and phalanxes would not slow the game down, instead it would offer a completely unique experience for the completely unique style of warfare during that time. The current gameplay is so tedious and dumb because of Ubisoft’s complete disregard for the slightest bit realism. At least give us the option. I despise rolling around like an idiot amongst scattered hoplites that aren’t even fighting in a formation.

I know there are no refunds, but I’ve been on the phone all day with Microsoft trying to get my money back.

Sweet, the scenery in the game regarding ancient Greece is pretty...but if I wanted only that I would’ve bought a freakin’ painting.

Dan.Aven
10-05-2018, 11:28 AM
What bugging me the most about the shields is, that every normal enemy can use them and got some fancy animations, espacially with spears. It is so sad, that you as player arent able to use them, too

And the stupid spear-length or let me beter say, that in cutscenes NPCs got the ordinary standard(-length) dory at this time and then in gameplay use these telescope-like spears. Urgh.
Why can´t we have at least a normal dory that that does not extend when drawn?

Lysette88
10-05-2018, 11:33 AM
I am not sure if what we are asking for, can be done at this stage.

This most likely - there might not be animations for it and if it fits into current game mechanics we will eventually know when we are further in the game.

SethUnleashed
10-05-2018, 11:33 AM
they COULD make it so that you can wear a shield INSTEAD of a second weapon as soon as you unlock that skill ...

on the other hand shields probably would make this game too easy as you can already parry arrows >.<

DrinkinMehStella
10-05-2018, 11:36 AM
What is the purpose of the AC series if not trying to take you back and immerse you in a certain time period?

Hoplon shields and phalanxes would not slow the game down, instead it would offer a completely unique experience for the completely unique style of warfare during that time. The current gameplay is so tedious and dumb because of Ubisoft’s complete disregard for the slightest bit realism. At least give us the option. I despise rolling around like an idiot amongst scattered hoplites that aren’t even fighting in a formation.

I know there are no refunds, but I’ve been on the phone all day with Microsoft trying to get my money back.

Sweet, the scenery in the game regarding ancient Greece is pretty...but if I wanted only that I would’ve bought a freakin’ painting.

im an easy dude, so for me when there is historical inaccuracy, no shields, no phalanxes etc its not a deal breaker and will not hinder my experience because like I said im easy and accept the game as it is, so I think the guys who are complaining and saying the games terrible based on historical inaccuracy and comparing ACO to real life its a bit shallow. yes I think why not add shields to the game it won't hurt anything, and yea I would like to see more art work and betting voice acting but I wouldn't say the game was terrible because of a few minor flaws. I see everyones point though.

ThroneOvSeth
10-05-2018, 11:44 AM
Give us shields. The code is there, it was in Origins, it makes even more sense in this game. Enemies are using shields. Why ban the player from using shields?

It's only one of a lot of small things that they downgraded or retrograded from Origins and I really can't understand why shields and enemy scaling, to give two examples, are no options anymore. OPTIONS, as in you can turn them off if you want to experience the game like the developer thought it would make sense, having a leveling system without the feeling of progression and not using shields in ancient Greece where shields were normal.

Ravenubi1991
10-05-2018, 03:43 PM
Glorious replies, Shield-brothers/Sisters!!.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/m8lSkYxXSv8/hqdefault.jpg

Keep em coming! Fight for our shields until the end and Dumont tells us to bugger off.

Dont stop believing!

http://www.radiomirchi.com/blog_images/molon-labe.jpg

Dont drop your shields!

circasomnia
10-05-2018, 07:33 PM
Not only they won't add shields as an option for Kassandra / Alexios but also forced enemy level scaling will remain ON forever. You are wasting your time with complaints....

This seems to be the case with Ubisoft. They are just too big, and too out of touch with actual players to listen to feedback and then implement changes accordingly.

Wh1chd0ct0r1
10-05-2018, 11:15 PM
You gave us freedom to choose who to be, where to go, how to play..... why force us to fight a specific way.

I’m more than happy to fight defensively, toe to toe with my opponent, weathering the blows and waiting for an opportunity to strike

I get why they want to force aggressive combat but not everyone wants to be an Achilles.

Even Leonidas fought with a shield and he was a beast

Let us have the choice

FROST1095
10-07-2018, 12:54 AM
I completely agree that shield should become part of player's arsenal. They were too much a big part of ancient warfare to leave them completely out of player reach. Beside, they would not slow down the combat system since they were used as a weapon too. Hoplites used them to ram their opponent and finishing 'em with the spear when enemies breaked down.

Ravenubi1991
10-08-2018, 02:43 AM
"Beside, they would not slow down the combat system since they were used as a weapon too. Hoplites used them to ram their opponent and finishing 'em with the spear when enemies breaked down."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was literally screaming this to myself when I read Dumont's post, stating it would in some undefined, indescribable way hurt the " smoothness" of the game. Which is a preposterous statement considering there is literally zero visual and barely gameplay differnence from Origins and Oddysey right now.
Aside from a few active abilities, its the exact same.

Keep up the requests, people. I dont get what Dumont's problem with shields is but its so damn meh. Shields have never been so important in an AC game before.
And it would be god damn sad if they go to Rome afterwards and we can't use Scutum either..... jesus.

Listen to what people are telling you, Ubisoft. tell Dumont, someone! People would like shields. Even those that dont plan on using em still enjoy the option of having one.

Because customization is THE BEST.

LumeronDG
10-08-2018, 06:02 AM
"Come back with your shield or on it." - Spartan wives/lovers/mothers.

Shields were one of the most important aspects of Hellenic combat, so in terms of an authentic feel, not having them even as an option is an immersion-breaker.

Is the game fantastic? Sure is. But like every great game, it can always be made even better.

LumeronDG
10-08-2018, 06:08 AM
This seems to be the case with Ubisoft. They are just too big, and too out of touch with actual players to listen to feedback and then implement changes accordingly.

It could be good to add an option for enemy scaling to be disabled, but I thought the way scaling was done in Odyssey was one of the most brilliant scalings I've ever seen in a game. Even bumped my difficulty up to raise the low-end bar of scaling. Do you (or others) actually dislike it? If so, hopefully they add an option for it like I heard they did in Origins.

Valkohir
10-08-2018, 06:11 AM
we need shields in the game so bad its Not even funny... the only 1 featurw THAT NEEDED TO BE IN THE GAME is not in the game in favor of a fking autistic roll and perry... as if you couldnt do any of that **** with a shield... not to mention you dont even use the spear when using 2 handed weapons i dont ser why a shield should be a problem when you're holding a shrinkable Pike.. if anything their excuse is just pure lazyness OR maybe they're planning a dlc where the character actually gets a shield its skill tree.. other than that.. their response to why we cant have a shield is just plain and simple lazyness

robertvaneijk88
10-08-2018, 06:28 AM
Wow, this game doesn't have shields? I only hit lvl 5, but was already wondering when they'd be unlocked.

That's disappointing... :(

Why showing a prologue with awesome Spartan warriors with shield and spears and then decide not to add them to the gameplay? Shields were used by most warriors back in those times...

Olympus2018
10-08-2018, 07:43 AM
74% want a shield! And 93% want the optional enemy level scaling....

Dan.Aven
10-08-2018, 11:54 AM
Hey guys, Ubi_Zubi has reacted on this thread at the bottom of Page 25, maybe you can spend some answers also there, so Ubisoft get more voices to hear on this topic :)
https://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1894075-Odyssey-shields/page25

Valkohir
10-09-2018, 02:25 PM
this poll needs to be revived!!!

BitingSquirrel4
10-10-2018, 05:37 AM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

The fact that this is even a question for a game set in Ancient Greece is just sad.

The devs really screwed this up big time. Takes so much away from the experience.

And screw that answer about “passive defense.” If that’s how I wanna play then that’s my decision, devs shouldn’t make it for me.

Olympus2018
10-10-2018, 07:42 AM
I can live without shields.
I can live without optional enemy level scaling....
But no Mount Olympus in Greece???? What kind of Greece is this? It's like England without London. Come on Ubisoft.... Really?

Nightfall--
10-10-2018, 09:20 AM
Maybe we could find Leonidas' shield and have that instead of the spear?

DrinkinMehStella
10-10-2018, 09:48 AM
I can live without shields.
I can live without optional enemy level scaling....
But no Mount Olympus in Greece???? What kind of Greece is this? It's like England without London. Come on Ubisoft.... Really?

yes so true, I was disappointed when I noticed no mount Olympus, maybe will come as part of a DLC?


Maybe we could find Leonidas' shield and have that instead of the spear?

the spear is effectively your hidden blade and would make no sense to not have that.

Valkohir
10-10-2018, 11:56 AM
yes so true, I was disappointed when I noticed no mount Olympus, maybe will come as part of a DLC?



the spear is effectively your hidden blade and would make no sense to not have that.

just like it makes sense not to have a broken spear that you ouly use when u use a sword and dagger

Alexlionfire
10-10-2018, 12:22 PM
The only time I used shields in Origins was in the beginning. Then I completely forgot about them. Dodging works better. I only upgraded them for the provided benefits. Health and whatever else. Still, they looked fine on Bayek's back. But with Odyssey that's totally different. It makes sense to be able to use shields. They were such an important and active part of combat back then. They send us to war against the might of Athens and Sparta without this simple yet very effective weapon. What's even worse is the fact that your enemies wear them and you just salivate at how cool they look then make a Chuck Norris move to remove this advantage of theirs. Cmon UBI!

SpcSpiro
10-10-2018, 03:36 PM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?

Without a doubt! They absolutely should include the OPTION of using shields. If you do not like the shield gameplay then do not use it. But they have taken that option away from the customers. Not only that, they were seeking historical accuracy but yet almost every character in this game uses a shield except you...the shield was one of the biggest components on Greece at this time. Please fix Ubisoft :(

Ravenubi1991
10-10-2018, 03:44 PM
+Nightfall___

The idea here is that we'd have the choice. Like imagine how cool that would be

Playstyle stealth offensive = Leonidas's spear in short form

Playstyle melee dual wield offensive = Leonidas spear short or long form.

Playstyle Defensive = Leonidas's Spear + leonidas's shield.

I mean come on. Who wouldn't want to wear spartan armor and have BOTH a long version of the spear + a super big badass spartan shield as a customization option?

https://www.sideshowtoy.com/mas_assets/jpg/9015141_press01-001.jpg

Its nerdgasm worthy level of Holy ####. And Ubisoft can literally be the first ones to ever do it in 3rd person form without it being a cool Skyrim Mod.

Please listen, Dumont!!!!!!!!! You push this game as being an RPG more so than ever now. Then let us have some proper modern RPG customization as well.
If Cassandra and Alexios weren't spartans. ONLY fullblown assassins, trained to use stealth and daggers etc and nothing else this shield lack wouldn't be a problem.

But they are mercs. They are warriors. And that totally changes the rules and opens the door to grand customization and fantasy. We want to feel like GREEK WARRIORS OF OLD.

And greek warriors of old used shields. Famous for it.

Ravenubi1991
10-10-2018, 03:57 PM
Wow, this game doesn't have shields? I only hit lvl 5, but was already wondering when they'd be unlocked.

That's disappointing... :(

Why showing a prologue with awesome Spartan warriors with shield and spears and then decide not to add them to the gameplay? Shields were used by most warriors back in those times...

I had that exact bummer just 10 days before the game was released. I was mega hyped, super excited and considering which version of the game to buy. Then I was wondering why no gameplay footage featured shields and I looked further into it. And 1 single google search killed my hype and my mood entirely.

God. Dont stop bringing it up. Lets keep demanding it until Ubisoft yields and realizes they've made a mistake.At least until Ubisoft comes out and says its impossible or something because coding. Which would suck but christ... I'd rather get that as a explanation rather than " It hurts the smoothness of the game" which is total and utter nonsense when the gameplay is 99 % similar to Origins. You just have some active abilities.

SofaJockey
10-10-2018, 06:19 PM
I voted 'no' because the poll is rigged.
it's easy to say yes to having an option.

However, no development is done in a vacuum, the real choice is not yes or no,
it's this or that.

If the question were do you want shields instead of a piece of planned DLC, then suddenly you're making a choice.
we also don't know how much of a PITA it would be to build a shield mechanic, and design a control scheme, which may be more significant than people credit.

ProdiGurl
10-10-2018, 06:32 PM
Yep - these Option based polls are always going to bring majority *yes* for choice. It's a popular choice, but I said no too.
I much prefer that POE spear than a shield to stand behind. We already had them in Origins.

Khaos004
10-10-2018, 06:46 PM
Oh my God when will people let this shield thing go?!
There are no shields. The developers have undoubtedly heard people on this forum want shields.
They will either add shields or they won't.
That's it. Get over it.

Ravenubi1991
10-11-2018, 11:48 AM
Poll is rigged? That makes zero sense. Its a super straight forward question.
If people vote yes its because they want the option. If people want no its because they either dont like shields at all, think our criticism is unwarranted which it isn't (looking at you, Khaos004. We'll keep bringing it up till they do because we care, unlike you) or clearly they overthink the entire question apparently.

"do you think we should have the option or not?" We base this specific question on the lead designers stance that shields would hurt the game for some extremely weird reason and disregards player choice outright as well as enhanced customization. By arguing that we want the CHOICE. The OPTION... we emphasize that we LIKE having suhc features in our games. Our RPG's now since AC oddysey has embraced such aspects.


Its that simple. This has already been elaborated on quite a lot. And the request is NOT going away because its outright dumb to be a warrior in ancient greece and not be able to use a shield.
ESPECIALLY when we're fighting archers and we had the option to use a shield in the previous game.
A game is supposed to EVOLVE... not devolve.

And by the way. Voting no to this is all well and good. But voting no just to be edgy and arguably disregard your own stance on this because " I dont like the mainstream viewpoint" is just cringe and edgy.

People are not following the popular opinion here. it just IS:..the popular opinion to have the option to use a god damn shield in ancient greece.

So with all due respect Prodi. You're an ***. You're insulting people who vote yes, claiming they just follow the big number and can't think for themselves. Yet a whole damn bunch of people who's commented here let alone voted have expressed their voting yes in GREAT detail.

Just because you can't read and choose to disregard our love for the game and wanting it to be better, doens't mean that we dont know what we're talking about. Or that we just follow whats popular. People here very much know why they vote yes. Because they've played the game and are still playing and would love to use a shield like in Origins. Because its cool. because its sparta. Because we're fighting archers. Because it could be fun to shield bash people off cliffs.

Because the players are greek themselves and love their cultural heritage of the shield being important to their ancients.
And thats just to name a few reasons given by people here.

If you disagree and vote no. Thats totally fine.
But dont smear this thread nor the people who vote yes...

We are fans like you who want the game to be better and carry over what works from Origins. Not have it degrade when a shield has never been more appropriate in AC history.

AlphaDaVinci
10-11-2018, 03:46 PM
Do you think shields are important for this time period?Are you jealous of all those enemies that carry a shield?Would you like to have the option to use a shield(even if you don't like them)?


Of course they should. Why would anyone vote no to this when it's just an option that would if anything appease more players, sell more copies, and yield more cash flow for long term support? I also find it kinda suspect that the one person that voted no so far did not comment, as if to make it look like a non issue, yet with no explanation to back it up.

We need sheilds. Like please. I love you Ubisoft

VenrisSFO
10-11-2018, 03:48 PM
No, no and no. I hated shield in Origins, happy that there isint any here.

Dtheawesome9010
10-11-2018, 03:53 PM
No, no and no. I hated shield in Origins, happy that there isint any here.

it's just an option its not like we are wanting the shields to be like origins where you are stuck with a shield and you can't remove it

roflmfaoo
10-12-2018, 02:43 AM
I vote yes for the authenticity factor alone and for those who claim they would rather the piece of Eden instead. The spear and the sword/dagger combination would be optional. Just like the shield if it were implemented. The spear would be holstered whilst the shield if equipped instead. Just like how it's used for assassinations.

I wouldn't mind at all if they added it for aesthetically reasons and not alter the mechanics of combat, of course changing the mechanics to include combat would be awesome. It sucks that the protagonist is the leader of the anti-shield club.

The statement about diversity in the opening sequence which is highly pronounced throughout the game by the ability to have relations with npc's of the same sex yet force us to play a specific way is a little hypocritical don't you think?

Not to mention that in origins you had "costumes" that you equipped to look a certain way without affecting the stats of the armour yet in odyssey you're forced to look ridiculous if you want to spec your own build by the lack of this feature. Before one says that the coding isn't in the game, how do you explain your ship/horse/crew etc.. That very mechanic is already there.

So yes. I am all for adding shields in the game.

LEGATUS-AUGUSTI
10-12-2018, 05:18 AM
Combat system in Origins was an extremely passive garbage just because of shields..only noobs want shields

Here's the Origins standard pattern:

Enemy attack --> shield block --> counter attack --> enemy killed

Personally i prefer the game alot without shields. It's super dynamic and challenging (playing nightmare mode)

Dtheawesome9010
10-12-2018, 01:09 PM
Combat system in Origins was an extremely passive garbage just because of shields..only noobs want shields

Here's the Origins standard pattern:

Enemy attack --> shield block --> counter attack --> enemy killed

Personally i prefer the game alot without shields. It's super dynamic and challenging (playing nightmare mode)

OK You can like the no shields thing but a lot of people want it because of the era in this game there may be some noobs but dammit i personally want the shield for era purposes and the fact they look badass in Greece. Don't just say only noobs want shields it's not true end of story.

KmarkoPL
10-12-2018, 01:35 PM
I say no !!
Shields are for nobs and wossies !!
First was ACO where they completely removed crap fight system where you could kill bunch of enemy without even taking a hit
Now ACOD removed shields to have more fluid and active fight system.
I like the change and support devs for doing so.
Old system must die and that is the time for shields now to be gone.

Dtheawesome9010
10-12-2018, 01:51 PM
I say no !!
Shields are for nobs and wossies !!
First was ACO where they completely removed crap fight system where you could kill bunch of enemy without even taking a hit
Now ACOD removed shields to have more fluid and active fight system.
I like the change and support devs for doing so.
Old system must die and that is the time for shields now to be gone.

I just said this to another guy you can like the no shield thing but calling everyone a nob and a wuss (previously you said they were for p**sies) its so not true shields were a tool for survival and a tool for offense there may be some noobs but not all. If you were to call a Spartan a wuss or coward for using a shield you would get a spear through your throat to shut you up. Point is you can use a shield and still feel badass

KmarkoPL
10-12-2018, 02:00 PM
This is fantasy game not on true facts
If you can not to find the difference between, it you should go check your head.
The game don't have to be history accurate.
Once again, no crap shields, and I hope Ubisoft will not be bothered by your crying or threaten. You think they care if some moron will say not buying cause no shield ? No !
They already got big sale 300k + copies on all platforms.

Dtheawesome9010
10-12-2018, 02:06 PM
This is fantasy game not on true facts
If you can not to find the difference between, it you should go check your head.
The game don't have to be history accurate.
Once again, no crap shields, and I hope Ubisoft will not be bothered by your crying or threaten. You think they care if some moron will say not buying cause no shield ? No !
They already got big sale 300k + copies on all platforms.

Oh feisty I LOVE it this is an assassin's creed game where history is supposed to be accurate but still have its lore you can like no shields but dammit its still supposed to be historical accurate to a fair and good amount

roflmfaoo
10-12-2018, 02:22 PM
This is fantasy game not on true facts
If you can not to find the difference between, it you should go check your head.
The game don't have to be history accurate.
Once again, no crap shields, and I hope Ubisoft will not be bothered by your crying or threaten. You think they care if some moron will say not buying cause no shield ? No !
They already got big sale 300k + copies on all platforms.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your comment alone. The whole assassin's creed franchise is based on historical accuracy so to completely disregard the effort put into the assassin's creed franchise by claiming it's fantasy is absurd.

A healthy debate does not make someone a moron or a crybaby just because there are a select majority that want shields for authenticity. If you're unable to debate without resorting to immature insults/comments I think it's best you don't involve yourself.

Just to note. 300k+ doesn't mean successful. Spider-man sold 3.3 million within the first 3 days. Why? Because the level of detail the developers went into. There are a lot of others like myself who aspire for accuracy and detail in games. Immersion, it's what really makes a game all the better. God of war another immenseful success because of that, the level of accuracy in norse lore and the level of detail. It doesn't take a genius to realise this.

Ravenubi1991
10-12-2018, 03:18 PM
+ Legatus Augusti + Kmarko PL

Here we are asking for player customization, options, player choice and historical (not realism) authenticity because the rest of the game follows it quite delicately. Suggesting friendly options that wont impact others gameplay style because its optional.

And you guys call us names and make us out as crybabies ?

Why is it its so hard for you kids to just agree to disagree civilly? Without calling other people names simply because we liked Origins shield option. We dont want to take away from your experience, lol. We only ask Ubisoft dont take away from ours. Especially considering Oddysey's circumstances.

Adding player choice to a game is good. Nobody is forcing you to use it. Thats the whole point of this thread. Thats the whole point of good game development and evolution. Not to FORCE things on people that they dislike. But to give them a choice.

Kmarko. The combat system is 98 % the same from Origins... you just got active abilities...

And btw, guys. Using a shield, playing defensively to not to take damage... is the LITTERAL POINT... of using it -_-...
"First was ACO where they completely removed crap fight system where you could kill bunch of enemy without even taking a hit"
You're the noob here, man. Thats not me insulting you. Thats me telling you you dont play on hard difficulty. Are you even god damn aware that 1 single bloody hit from various enemies on higher difficulty can outright 1 shot you.

That might be fun for you if you're a masochist. Maybe you LOVED being riddled by arrows in Origins, let alone Oddysey. But we dont. We like to block and STAY ALIVE. You know.

Honestly. These arguments against shields are so weird. If you dislike using a shield, THATS FINE. More power to you. Dual wield ftw.

But arguing shields are mechanically bad or in gameplay terms inferior, or that improving your survivability is bad is outright crazy...
You're literally a spartan warrior. Spartans being famous for using shields.


"Only noobs use shields" -- "Only wossies " HAHA. yeah you go tell that to the 300 spartans at thermopylae. You go tell that to the roman legions that conquered the ancient world.

yeah... They were all a bunch of cowards because they utilized clever tactics and defensive formations against mindless barbarians that just wanted to YOLO offense.... sure.


Jesus christ, guys. Dont like shields, no problem.
But at least form a sensical argument if you want to litterally hate against our OPTION to include them.


https://www.spielesnacks.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Sparta-War-Of-Empires-Strategy-Game-e1432544868625.jpg


These guys were noobs and wossies... yeah right.


http://i0.wp.com/www.antifeministtech.info/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/picarddoublefacepalm.jpg

Jesus, guys.

Edit: EVEN KRATOS HIMSELF... in the new God of War has the option to use a shield. And he was artistically portrayed with one in the old.
I guess he's a big sissy too... Hahaha honestly, guys.

http://1920x1080hdwallpapers.com/image/201512/games/3793/god-of-war-ghost-of-sparta-kratos-shield-spear-poster.jpg

FROST1095
10-12-2018, 03:46 PM
What the hell is the problem with you people? The poll wasn't about change or not the combat system 'couz shield make it for noobs or not. It was about the possibility of add something extra to make more people enjoy it as they like. You don't like shield? Don't use it as you already did and nothing will change for you!

RaReInkarnation
10-12-2018, 04:09 PM
This is fantasy game not on true facts
If you can not to find the difference between, it you should go check your head.


I can post hundreds facts from all ACSR games to show you the opposite.
But i guess believing others opinions will never be an option for you. It would not matter what we post.
You just refuse from principle. Prove for that is the fast used word with M.
You're a beginner in programing otherwise you would never wrote the last sentence.
There is everytime a possibility to integrate features. Especially if you have the source code, like Ubisoft?!

cawatrooper9
10-12-2018, 04:12 PM
Yeah, let's focus on the actual discussion and drop the attacks, everyone.

RaReInkarnation
10-12-2018, 04:19 PM
I dont know if the LOD got an update but after patch 1.03 there are two new dlc folders and in one of them (20) there are a lot of soldier with shield meshes and so on in the forge files. But i guess in the end it has nothing to do with that^^

roflmfaoo
10-12-2018, 04:21 PM
Yeah, let's focus on the actual discussion and drop the attacks, everyone.

Thank you!

The people opting no option for shield have not once come up with point valid enough to not have the option.

Many posts here have valid reasons for including the option to have shields and I completely agree with them.

Ravenubi1991
10-12-2018, 04:34 PM
I can post hundreds facts from all ACSR games to show you the opposite.
But i guess believing others opinions will never be an option for you. It would not matter what we post.
You just refuse from principle. Prove for that is the fast used word with M.
You're a beginner in programing otherwise you would never wrote the last sentence.
There is everytime a possibility to integrate features. Especially if you have the source code, like Ubisoft?!

This reminds me of the The total war developer, Creative Assembly and how they are currently having a bit of a tiff with some fans over historical realism vs historical authenticity.
And although it can be difficult to seperate the two, their ideas is that they try to keep a game as close to historical authenticity in terms of visuals, people, names, locations, weaponry and such as possible.
But play loose with a few rules concerning amounts of units, ability to recruit female generals more commonly than they were present in real times, and so on. Stuff like that.

Kmarko. In case you still dont fully understand. AC games are indeed fictional. But they are fictional within the sense and setting of a historically authentic world. And we like it when this authenticity is kept respected because it adds to the sense of immersion. World building and willing suspension of disbelief.

If we said ancient sparta was in China and they were all african women who fought without armor and used daggers whilst riding pigs. That would be a totally weird damn game and it would uttely kill our ability to take it seriously.
if the game was just some crazy fictional game then thats fine.

But AC games have always kept a fine line between its fantasy aspects such as the real ancient world portrayed historically accurately to great (not full) extent. because it helps us as players and fans of history to immerse ourselves and play something that advertises itself as visiting the past, enjoying cool ancient histories with ancient characters. Thats why I personally love AC 2 because we got to meet fascinating character like Leondardo Da Vinci himself. Seeing him as an artist. But also a cool engineer. making extremely epic gadgets like the secret hand gun.

Bottomline is: AC games have always balanced the fiction with the historical authenticity. In order to tell stories that used historical characters in cool creative, fictional ways to make a good video game.
And it bums us that shields, which are a HUGE factor of ancient greek historical authencitity is not available.
Just like it would not being able to use a japanese Katana when we one day visit Japan in AC:
Or being unable to use the Scutum in Ancient Rome.

Or more simply put in a theoretical sense. If one day we get an AC game without a hidden blade or assassination tactic AT ALL.
That'll be a HUGE core factor of the entire franchise, lost. And that just feels bad.

That how we feel with shields, being such huge fans of ancient greece, Sparta, the phalanx, hoplites, and more.

I hope this helps you understand why we're having this huge discussion and why people are using the terms: Historical authenticity / realism.

Ravenubi1991
10-12-2018, 04:36 PM
I dont know if the LOD got an update but after patch 1.03 there are two new dlc folders and in one of them (20) there are a lot of soldier with shield meshes and so on in the forge files. But i guess in the end it has nothing to do with that^^

Lets dream!! ... if only for a little bit. :) Maybe we'll be surprised sometime.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/d2/ae/35/d2ae35bb3d594e553ddd5b6360beb7cb.jpg

roflmfaoo
10-12-2018, 06:14 PM
If one day we get an AC game without a hidden blade or assassination tactic AT ALL.
That'll be a HUGE core factor of the entire franchise, lost. And that just feels bad.

That how we feel with shields, being such huge fans of ancient greece, Sparta, the phalanx, hoplites, and more.

I hope this helps you understand why we're having this huge discussion and why people are using the terms: Historical authenticity / realism.

I haven't fully finished the storyline in odyssey yet but so far I have seen no hidden blade. I don't believe there is a hidden blade in odyssey but cannot say for sure. Although if it is as such then it is a big change for the assassin's creed series.

Ravenubi1991
10-12-2018, 08:32 PM
I haven't fully finished the storyline in odyssey yet but so far I have seen no hidden blade. I don't believe there is a hidden blade in odyssey but cannot say for sure. Although if it is as such then it is a big change for the assassin's creed series.

Hey man. The blade is still here. Its just replaced by Leonidas's Spear. So technically its still here. its function remains and works well although not its usual visual weapon.
Thats why I included further elabotaration = " or assassination tactic AT ALL. "
But yeah. should've elaborated furhter. It is very different from the usual blade.

KmarkoPL
10-12-2018, 11:11 PM
Hey man. The blade is still here. Its just replaced by Leonidas's Spear. So technically its still here. its function remains and works well although not its usual visual weapon.
Thats why I included further elabotaration = " or assassination tactic AT ALL. "
But yeah. should've elaborated furhter. It is very different from the usual blade.

If I remember correctly, the real assassin's hidden blade, will be revealed in one of the Season pass DLCs

RaReInkarnation
10-12-2018, 11:40 PM
I hope this helps you understand why we're having this huge discussion and why people are using the terms: Historical authenticity / realism.

Write more if you want but you refused your comment due of the last written posts by you.
I know why you did that discussion but you seems completely out of range in sight of possibilities.
First you said it is fanstasy and now it is more for you! Yeah kk, you will rule the fourm. Ubisoft will do your favours!
Same here like KCD, you can only think that people want 100% realism but you didnt read enough, it was never the full goal by players. But it is much more important to say some morons crying and ubi will never do something.

Bye

roflmfaoo
10-12-2018, 11:40 PM
If I remember correctly, the real assassin's hidden blade, will be revealed in one of the Season pass DLCs

That would be a nice addition. I await the season pass to hit psn before I purchase though.

TenaciousDan10
10-13-2018, 01:54 AM
Hey datAssassin2018!

I'm interested to know as to why it's not authentic for you without shields.

are you joking? Have you not read or studied any greek history? like at a minimum even watch the movie 300?

TenaciousDan10
10-13-2018, 02:25 AM
Not adding shields in this game is like not adding ammo clips to shooting games.

Luizgazen
10-13-2018, 02:33 AM
i believe the reason for the lack of playable shields in odissey is more practical then of a vision of the game, in this game the MC swims, climbs, rolls, ride, jumps, etc... in origins they could use small bucklers which didn't affect the animations, but greek shields were much larger, the smaller ingame models are almost the size of an adult so there was no way to make the animations work with them.

roflmfaoo
10-13-2018, 02:38 AM
i believe the reason for the lack of playable shields in odissey is more practical then of a vision of the game, in this game the MC swims, climbs, rolls, ride, jumps, etc... in origins they could use small bucklers which didn't affect the animations, but greek shields were much larger, the smaller ingame models are almost the size of an adult so there was no way to make the animations work with them.

The shield size is proportional to the character model like the NPC's.

Luizgazen
10-13-2018, 02:54 AM
still a problem, the smaller shields in the game usually cover from head to thigs on the npc wearing them, the largest ones from head to toe, even scalling to these proportions on the MC would lead to terrible clipping and obstruction of sight

D0MFTW
10-13-2018, 06:52 AM
https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-19-2014/4Th3Ax.gif (/gif/300-shield-bash-4Th3Ax)

RaReInkarnation
10-13-2018, 11:18 AM
Historical Fact is real but some peasants seraching for arguments which arent ones.
The only fact why Ubisoft cut them was, they arent interested in making real based games.
That's why Origins is at the time where the pharaoh dynasties ends. Everything else is just hypocrisy!

Ravenubi1991
10-13-2018, 01:21 PM
i believe the reason for the lack of playable shields in odissey is more practical then of a vision of the game, in this game the MC swims, climbs, rolls, ride, jumps, etc... in origins they could use small bucklers which didn't affect the animations, but greek shields were much larger, the smaller ingame models are almost the size of an adult so there was no way to make the animations work with them.

They can easily find a way around that by limitting the movement of a shield's dynamics during specific movement like swimming.
Other games have done this brilliants. Like Witcher 3. And if a bit of clipping ever happened it would hardly be of great issue. But again. They can control the dynamics of X item without issue. Thats absolutely not an issue since its a video game. Not real life. Armor, weight, clunky feel, oversized spears and axes. Video game dynamics can make all of that stuff work without issue.
Lower the size of X shield. Adjust it properly. Prevent X weapon from clipping with X shield. Let shield move in a certain way only under water or riding a horse.
Its all very simple and have been done very well in games like the witcher. Geralt used 2 swords. The movement of the swords and sheaths are minimal. He can run, walk, gallop and make turns. The sheath movement is minimal and well adjusted almost the swords are pretty damn large. And we're talking about spartan shields here =

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/06/d0/a4/06d0a48b0490d0c15ad593189125617f.jpg
Upon riding our character could hold the shield actively if back clipping became an issue.

However it shouldn't be a problem still due to my witcher 3 comparison explanation. Location, physics, dynamics can all be adjusted.

Furthermore. The shield isn't too big either. European shields were larger and would usually cover a far larger amount of the soldiers legs. But the greeks utilized leg cover so the greek hoplons should only reach from shoulder to just near the knee. Thats not hard to adjust in a sheathed position =

https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/830202614963181307/CCE4342AFCFB3CB536B91F968159CD08E9500CEF/

If it was THIS shield, Id' argue: yeah. That'll be a bit silly and maybe we should have some adjusts made to mobility when using it. But thats not the case though =

http://witicles.com/article_image/giant-shield-onhand-God-you-big-Omolara.jpg

Plus we already know the reason. Dumont the lead designer said it was screwing with the smoothness of combat. Which is not at all something I've ever noticed.
It simple means that: Hey. We want you to attack more. Not block attack. Kill faster, do more damage. Dont block.

And thats BS because thats taking away playstyles that are fun to play, let alone useful when enemies get really damn difficulty unless you use a bow to 1 shot stuff with 1 million damage.

Anyway. What would the shield look like on the back? Would it possible be too big to have sheathed? Nope. Proof being right here =
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-35c232dba5d02179d192b26f0438a1cd-c

That shield is only a bit smaller than a spartan shield, and as you can see when its on his back, its elevated a bit to cover his neck to prevent issues when he's walking and running.
Same can be done with a spartan shield, no matter whether its 100 % historically realistic. Again, video game. Its totally doable.

But all that aside. As I already stated. Dynamics can be adjusted. Clipping can be eliminated by limitating X amount of free floating. And worst comes to worst. Just make the shield a bit smaller or all of them similar size to those that function.
Hell.I dont care about having some colossal shield. I'd care about its various visual designs. Bull icons, sparta icons, etc etc. Let alone of various material.

LaMOi
10-13-2018, 01:31 PM
I like the combat without the shield - but would love the option of using a shield.

roflmfaoo
10-13-2018, 04:56 PM
still a problem, the smaller shields in the game usually cover from head to thigs on the npc wearing them, the largest ones from head to toe, even scalling to these proportions on the MC would lead to terrible clipping and obstruction of sight

The majority of spartan shields were not huge but there are shields in the game that are carried by larger enemies, the brute kind. The fact that the shields are present in the game does not pose an issue to animations etc... They have the resources there as shields were present in origins also.

Just to add, clipping isn't really an issue and obstruction of sight isn't either since it's not first person view.

https://i.postimg.cc/8JbmYbG4/20181013-170543.jpg (https://postimg.cc/8JbmYbG4)

There are small and large shields present already as demonstrated by the image above.

Ravenubi1991
10-13-2018, 09:33 PM
The majority of spartan shields were not huge but there are shields in the game that are carried by larger enemies, the brute kind. The fact that the shields are present in the game does not pose an issue to animations etc... They have the resources there as shields were present in origins also.

Just to add, clipping isn't really an issue and obstruction of sight isn't either since it's not first person view.

https://i.postimg.cc/8JbmYbG4/20181013-170543.jpg (https://postimg.cc/8JbmYbG4)

There are small and large shields present already as demonstrated by the image above.

Good comment. Nicely done alligning them soldiers for the perfect photo. Haha.

roflmfaoo
10-14-2018, 02:40 AM
Good comment. Nicely done alligning them soldiers for the perfect photo. Haha.

Thank you. Let's hope Ubisoft listen.

Atom.Scorpius
10-14-2018, 06:08 AM
They should allow the player to use Shields, it won’t even be that much work as it’s already written into the game for the AI,
UBISOFT could make it as a Free Bonus DLC to the fans of the series.

A new skill tree with the Abilities to upgrade the shield, so it absorbs more damage,
Add a cosmetic box to change the shield paints, with rare and legendary designs.

The problem is they need to transfer all the moves of the AI to the player, needs to be an option to store the shield on the characters back when not in use,
or store it in the ship.

Someone will probably make an unofficial Mod of this for the PC version anyway, like they did on The Witcher.

KmarkoPL
10-14-2018, 09:10 AM
Someone will probably make an unofficial Mod of this for the PC version anyway, like they did on The Witcher.

Ubisoft games are not mod friendly and can not be modded to such extend.
All you get some outfit modification and shaders, just like in ACO

longjohn119
10-14-2018, 12:06 PM
Parrying and dodge work well enough in this game I don't think a shield is really necessary .... I admit I had my doubts at first but after getting the hang of the upgraded Parry and Dodge I just don't see the need. However about the only thing I used the shield for in Origins was the charge move that knocked them down and there is an Ability that does about the same thing

longjohn119
10-14-2018, 12:13 PM
Another problem is you would have to map it as an Ability because there are no buttons left and you'd probably have to map it to the ranged weapon wheel meaning you'd have to sacrifice one of your Ranged perks to implement it .....

Frankly I think getting too technical about "authenticity" in a game with magic spears and and a Sci-Fi story line is a bit ridiculous

Mystic5hadow
10-14-2018, 01:25 PM
Yes! I am honestly surprised we don't get to use shields considering the era we're exploring. Shield and spear would be incredible.

Ravenubi1991
10-14-2018, 03:17 PM
Another problem is you would have to map it as an Ability because there are no buttons left and you'd probably have to map it to the ranged weapon wheel meaning you'd have to sacrifice one of your Ranged perks to implement it .....

Frankly I think getting too technical about "authenticity" in a game with magic spears and and a Sci-Fi story line is a bit ridiculous

No no, man. No need to map it as an ability. Just use Origins approach of selecting it in inventory menu.
Like witcher 3 and most RPG's. Mass effect 1 or Andromeda. Select the gun you want in loadout ( not that I suggest a fixed loadout ofc. need that free inventory menu) then equip item and boom. You're good to go. Sure, we'd have a fixed version of X playstyle but tbh, I dont mind. Again, go to inventory menu and alter one of your gear key shortcuts to either be defensive with shield or offensive with dual wield. Etc.

Nice and simple. It does not at all have to remotely affect your new abilities. Its just a weapon slot.

https://icdn3.digitaltrends.com/image/assassins_creed_origins_microsoft_e3_2017-12509-1500x844.jpg?ver=1

There you go. This is all we need. A little slot called shield. The End. Its really that simple.

https://blogs-images.forbes.com/erikkain/files/2018/06/aco-7.jpg

All they gotta do is to make the icons a bit smaller, move em to the side. Boom. Room for more. Problem solved.
Which they have plenty of room for too since Origins had way more smaller icons with upgrades as you can tell.

So yeah. Thats not an issue at all.

And in terms of your first comment = Its not just about what the game technically needs. Its what the players enjoy doing, playing around with.

A game can technically work if you have 1 character in 1 world with 1 quest 1 piece of armor, 1 boss. All of it being 10 out of 10 quality, but its still only 1 yet we slap 60 dollars on it anyway and call it a day.

But we would like more. Like to play it longer. have more armors, more bosses, more playstyles.

Its just good gaming, evolution of the games core and fun cool features that makes the experience feel fresh and evolving.

roflmfaoo
10-14-2018, 04:12 PM
Not to forget that in origins there was a slot for tools which has been removed in odyssey.

Irrespective of how difficult it would or will be to add, to completely ignore the fact that shields were a very big part of warfare in this era is rather arrogant. Allowing everyone except the main character to use shields is like rubbing salt in the wound.

There are a lot of things odyssey has gone in reverse. Charging customers for a game then adding microtransactions is flipping the bird to the customer. It was expected if it were a free to play MMO as that was their business model but to expect the customer to spend further money on things is bad.

There are many things Ubisoft have done which are arguably questionable and I realise that the majority don't actually give a damn what I say, but power in numbers. There are others that reflect my own opinion. All we have to do is voice our opinion and we shall be heard. It works for feminism and sexual orientations so why the hell not for the consumer? It's just so saddening that Ubisoft are taking the same approach that EA have.

TenaciousDan10
10-14-2018, 07:30 PM
Ubisoft giving us the poo cover Ubishaft with all this stupid cucqoldery

BabelFish2013
10-14-2018, 08:30 PM
Yes shields for the PC should be added. Right now I feel like Oberyn from Game of Thrones, not a Spartan. A shiekd would fix that...

projectpat06
10-15-2018, 03:28 AM
I’ve never been more jealous of a shield. Everyone has one in this game except the character we play.

I appreciate the story behind the spear but I really wish we had the option for a shield or at least steal and use one.

Olympus2018
10-15-2018, 08:09 AM
Only one out of four voters said no to shields....

roflmfaoo
10-15-2018, 10:19 AM
Unless I'm missing something the actual poll doesn't appear to be there on mobile.

I voted yes. Many people said about the shield not only in this thread but also on YouTube/Facebook etc...

It just makes sense to add them.

jdelange
10-15-2018, 10:59 AM
Except for bringing up the ability wheel, L1 (on PS4) has no use
L1 could be used to bring up your shield and still use abilities

roflmfaoo
10-15-2018, 11:16 AM
Or even L3/R3 which do absolutely nothing.

robertthebard
10-15-2018, 11:22 AM
Why you didn't vote yes since you like spartan shields.I understand why you voted no but the question asked if they should give an additional option for players that want to use it.Why people are so negative I don't understand.

I voted no, and I like the way they look, but I have a DLC quest that's bugged out, and I'd rather they fix that than spend a couple of months working on shields for the protagonist, when they already have a good setup running now. It doesn't have anything to do with being negative, it has everything to do with priorities.

roflmfaoo
10-15-2018, 11:32 AM
I voted no, and I like the way they look, but I have a DLC quest that's bugged out, and I'd rather they fix that than spend a couple of months working on shields for the protagonist, when they already have a good setup running now. It doesn't have anything to do with being negative, it has everything to do with priorities.

Except the mechanic was present in origins. Odyssey is clearly a "reskin" else it would have taken longer to make like origins which took 2 years. Odyssey was released 11 months after origins. There's no way they can have that kind of turn around on a brand new game.

siralex1986
10-15-2018, 01:42 PM
Nah, I've always been a shield guy in every fantasy RPG and souls-like games, but here I feel like parrying is easy enough to master and combat is much, much more fluid and fun than Origins.

I like it better without shields!

Dtheawesome9010
10-15-2018, 02:13 PM
Except the mechanic was present in origins. Odyssey is clearly a "reskin" else it would have taken longer to make like origins which took 2 years. Odyssey was released 11 months after origins. There's no way they can have that kind of turn around on a brand new game.

apparently ubisoft has been working on this game for alot longer if i remember right they did this about the same time as origins IDK maybe I'm wrong can someone back or debunk this please thanks.

MnemonicSyntax
10-15-2018, 02:25 PM
Except the mechanic was present in origins. Odyssey is clearly a "reskin" else it would have taken longer to make like origins which took 2 years. Odyssey was released 11 months after origins. There's no way they can have that kind of turn around on a brand new game.

Odyssey started development the same time Origins did.

And while I am again, not against shields, just because it was in Origins doesn't mean it's something they can just transfer over to Odyssey. Especially considering the entire game revolves around the spear.

I'm not saying it's impossible, but I highly doubt it's as easy as people are thinking or saying based on the fact that shields were in Origins and therefore, could also *easily be added* to Odyssey.

Ravenubi1991
10-15-2018, 02:37 PM
I’ve never been more jealous of a shield. Everyone has one in this game except the character we play.

I appreciate the story behind the spear but I really wish we had the option for a shield or at least steal and use one.

Yeah i know the feeling. Sucks always getting comments on spartan shields, seeing them, or taking the shield from enemies and hitting them with it before dropping it.

Its just a big meh feeling every single time.
Lets keep bringing it up till Ubisoft devs respond to it.

Dtheawesome9010
10-15-2018, 02:53 PM
Yeah i know the feeling. Sucks always getting comments on spartan shields, seeing them, or taking the shield from enemies and hitting them with it before dropping it.

Its just a big meh feeling every single time.
Lets keep bringing it up till Ubisoft devs respond to it.

Let's be real here the devs response is most likely gonna be a bunch of crap hell maybe their crap response actually proves legit who knows but we all know Ubi and their issues there is a reason why i put them in my 4 worst game companies followed by EA,Activision,Bungie and of course Ubisoft. Yet I still play their games just out of hope that the next AC game turns out to be great well next AC game im not buying infact until Ubi gets their crap together I'm not buying crap ACOD was the last game. I hate breaking from a decade journey with new settings history etc etc but they shouldve taken more time and made things better and not so generic and boring with boss fights like Medusa I was really hoping to fight her but I saw the gameplay of her and I'm like that's it? So yeah I'm just done for now hell maybe I pick up this game where i left off if Ubisoft actually listens and implements stuff accordingly or If I just get bored and need a quick fix.

Raph_Leclaire
10-15-2018, 04:25 PM
So I'm obviously in favour of adding shields into Odyssey, but more than that, I would like some of the additional combat animations/options that were present in Origins but missing in Odyssey to be added as well.

I love a LOT about this game, like I do most AC titles, but I am profoundly disappointed by what they've done to combat. You'd expect there to be more attack options since they removed the shields, but NO--they actually have less combos. Other than special "Adrenaline" abilities, Melee Combat is limited to:

Mashing the R1 or R2 button for a 4 hit Light/Heavy attack Combo

Holding R2 for several seconds for a clunky Charge attack

And a single variant of Dodge + R1/R2 attack regardless of dodge direction


That's it.... Origins at least also had a HOLD R1 attack and some Shield/Block attack variants. It wasn't particularly deep in its attack repertoire, but it at least came a little closer to the FROM SOFTWARE games combat they tried to emulate.

Heck even the DODGE is more clunky in Odyssey. It was quicker and more responsive in Origins. Now we not only don't have a shield, but WE CAN'T EVEN DODGE THAT WELL!

I'm sorry if I sound like I'm ranting (I am a little), yet I really do like this game overall!
Which is why I think it's even more frustrating.
You expect a yearly franchise to improve upon itself and ADD not REMOVE...

MnemonicSyntax
10-15-2018, 04:27 PM
I actually love the dodge in Odyssey over Origins. The short/long dodge is pretty nice and can close the gap in combat scenarios. Plus, the perfect dodge slow-time is a great bonus.

roflmfaoo
10-15-2018, 05:05 PM
I don't dislike the dodge mechanic in odyssey but it's just the era, I feel they could have given players the option to use shield or not. This would have pleased many more players and surely have only had a more positive effect.


There are plenty of facts that mercenaries used shields even though... throughout the whole story the protagonist is referred to as a spartan,
their mother is spartan, the father a spartan

Perhaps someone from Ubisoft can shine some light on when development started for Odyssey. I just know that just over 11 months had passed between the release of origins and odyssey.

I know that the whole reason developers make games is to make a profit. Yes it fulfils the dreams of players by giving them worlds to explore but the main reason is to please the companies board of directors. Shares fall if profit isn't made and that doesn't make for a happy CEO. It would be only in the best interest of the company to give players what they want, which in turn shows in the sales figures. There's a reason why companies like Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Insomniac and Nintendo, succeed greatly because this is what they do. Please players by giving them what they want.

Take GTA V for example, it sold 11.2 million units in the first 24 hours. Ubisoft could equal that success if they just gave fans what they want.

robertthebard
10-15-2018, 09:31 PM
Except the mechanic was present in origins. Odyssey is clearly a "reskin" else it would have taken longer to make like origins which took 2 years. Odyssey was released 11 months after origins. There's no way they can have that kind of turn around on a brand new game.

Except it's not "just a reskin", they started development on it at about the same time as they did Origins. Ironically, it's easier for me to believe that, than that they did all the work that went into making this game in 11 months... :rolleyes:

KmarkoPL
10-15-2018, 10:52 PM
Take GTA V for example, it sold 11.2 million units in the first 24 hours. Ubisoft could equal that success if they just gave fans what they want.

Some times Ideas what players want, is not always good, and might not work with vision of the devs.

roflmfaoo
10-16-2018, 09:52 AM
Some times Ideas what players want, is not always good, and might not work with vision of the devs.

By giving fans what they want I mean in general, a truly immersed experience. Giving the player the belief they are the character they're playing. In my time in playing there have been quite a few aspects of the game which feel unpolished and by that I don't mean visually, although it has its moments, texture spikes to pixelated fire/clouds.

Odyssey has had a high level of bugs, more than it should have from missing quests, to NPCs being unable to be defeated. There are extensive reports for bugs and while I realise that no game can be 100% bug free, odyssey fails in that regard due to the nature of the bugs too. Some are game breaking and could not be fixed by a restart/re-install/ps4 database rebuild and required intervention by Ubisoft via a patch. I feel sorry for the early adopters because of this, they were sold a game which should have been tested for longer. I feel that Ubisoft rushed this in order to return to the annual sales again.

I'm still playing because I want value for money, however, I am sad to say that I think this is it for me. I don't think I will be purchasing another AC game.

Dtheawesome9010
10-16-2018, 03:20 PM
wont let this poll die out anytime soon

Ownador22
10-16-2018, 03:53 PM
It would be awesome if they add shields for players to use, they would care about their fanbase/playerbase, like we care about the game, like we do want more things added in AC: Odyssey :D sry for my bad English.

Hoosiers513
10-16-2018, 07:00 PM
People talk about the bugs and issues like The Witcher 3, Skyrim, and numerous other games didn't come out buggy as hell. Fun fact, the 2 I mentioned are still talked about as 2 of the best games ever made. Sure there's something to be said about not releasing games until they've been tested enough, but having friends who test games for a living, it's easier said than done. These games are SO MASSIVE, it's almost impossible to catch everything. Witcher 3 was basically unplayable for the first month. At least now they can quickly patch things with an update.

I think there's just a lot of Ubi haters on here, which is ironic that they spend so much time on a forum for a game developer they apparently hate so much. I guess it sucks because there's no other games they could play instead....oh wait...there are. I get it, they dropped hard on the modern day stuff. Maybe you wanted another linear one button stabathon. Or maybe you just plain don't like plenty of aspects of the game. All of that is fine, but why spend so much time hating on it when you could be doing something more fulfilling and playing games that you actually DO like. I don't think there's anything here with Odyssey that wasn't as advertised. We knew it wasn't going to have "true Assassins". We knew there were no shields to begin with. We knew there'd be MTs, dialogue trees, and probably not a whole lot more emphasis on MD story since there really hasn't been since AC3. If you knew all of this, still bought the game, and are now spending your time on here complaining about it, I feel no sympathy for you. If you have some issues, would like to make suggestions and have your voice heard by Ubi to hope they act on it, THEN I think you're in the right place.

roflmfaoo
10-17-2018, 12:20 AM
People talk about the bugs and issues like The Witcher 3, Skyrim, and numerous other games didn't come out buggy as hell. Fun fact, the 2 I mentioned are still talked about as 2 of the best games ever made. Sure there's something to be said about not releasing games until they've been tested enough, but having friends who test games for a living, it's easier said than done. These games are SO MASSIVE, it's almost impossible to catch everything. Witcher 3 was basically unplayable for the first month. At least now they can quickly patch things with an update.

I think there's just a lot of Ubi haters on here, which is ironic that they spend so much time on a forum for a game developer they apparently hate so much. I guess it sucks because there's no other games they could play instead....oh wait...there are. I get it, they dropped hard on the modern day stuff. Maybe you wanted another linear one button stabathon. Or maybe you just plain don't like plenty of aspects of the game. All of that is fine, but why spend so much time hating on it when you could be doing something more fulfilling and playing games that you actually DO like. I don't think there's anything here with Odyssey that wasn't as advertised. We knew it wasn't going to have "true Assassins". We knew there were no shields to begin with. We knew there'd be MTs, dialogue trees, and probably not a whole lot more emphasis on MD story since there really hasn't been since AC3. If you knew all of this, still bought the game, and are now spending your time on here complaining about it, I feel no sympathy for you. If you have some issues, would like to make suggestions and have your voice heard by Ubi to hope they act on it, THEN I think you're in the right place.

I think the point is misunderstood here, there are many players who wanted to don a shield/spear or shield/sword etc... considering the era odyssey is set in. Ubisoft have shields in the game just without the protagonists ability to utilise them. I also think that you have misconstrued hate for disappointment which is clearly felt by many players here who want Ubisoft to listen, take on board this feedback and act on it.

Odyssey really isn't assassin's creed but that's a story for another day. At this current time there aren't many new releases and odyssey fills the gap between other releases. You touched on the topic of advertising. For me personally, I didn't search for it because I had faith it was going to be as good as if not better than origins, I was left disappointed. The only advertising I saw was a 15 second cinematic clip on TV. I guess I could take partial blame for that however, I am not entirely dissatisfied just disappointed. The dialogue is lacking a lot in terms of conversation flow and some choices result in the same outcome irrelevant of the choice you make. The game clearly tries to squeeze gameplay time by deliberately sending you on a quest that's as far away from your location as possible.

There are business practices conducted by Ubisoft which are frowned upon by gamers. Releasing a game that is titled something and then not receiving stated game then placing what should have been included in the actual game behind a pay wall. Which Ubisoft have kindly done. The first DLC "Legacy of the first blade" promises to give a back story on the assassin's. This kind of content should have been in the main game considering the title.

Ubisoft may as well have given it a new title and there wouldn't have been many complaints. Remove animus sections and call it something like The Lost mercenary of Sparta, and no one would have questioned. Instead they decided to use a brand but sell players a story with very little connection to the title.

I can't emphasise enough that my presence here isn't to hate on Ubisoft but voice my personal opinion. I have, in the past been an avid fan of Ubisoft games from splinter cell to Prince of Persia. I just feel that this is it for Assassin's Creed for me personally.

RAV3NB0NES
10-17-2018, 12:27 AM
Why you didn't vote yes since you like spartan shields.I understand why you voted no but the question asked if they should give an additional option for players that want to use it.Why people are so negative I don't understand.

This is an overreaction to someone's comment.

He voted no because doesnt want that option. That is what the poll asks for, it isn't talking about everyone, it is talking about if YOU want the option. He doesnt want it. Just believe he likes the way a shield looks doesnt mean he wants to use it. Don't get so dramatic like a child thinking he is being "So negative" simply because he said no.

Just because of your outrage, I voted more. Amuse me further with your funny replies.

RAV3NB0NES
10-17-2018, 12:40 AM
Odyssey really isn't assassin's creed but that's a story for another day.

Neither was Black Flag... but nobody complained.

ConanA7
10-17-2018, 12:46 AM
Only because it's now an rpg and the whole point of an rpg is to have options... and the fact it is set in Greece doesn't make sense not having that choice. I'm sure a mercenary would utilise a shield for defense if every other faction used them, especially now stealth kills aren't a one strike certainty.

chimpoforevah
10-17-2018, 07:25 AM
Like others have said, this is my biggest gripe with the game. I want to feel like a real Spartan! I want to have the cool Spartan shields! The shield mechanic was WONDERFUL in Origins. It boggles me that they took out such a nice mechanic. Boggling!

AnthonySonny
10-17-2018, 08:00 AM
Black Flag is certainly more an assassin's creed than Origins and Odyssey.

Dtheawesome9010
10-17-2018, 02:07 PM
This is an overreaction to someone's comment.

He voted no because doesnt want that option. That is what the poll asks for, it isn't talking about everyone, it is talking about if YOU want the option. He doesnt want it. Just believe he likes the way a shield looks doesnt mean he wants to use it. Don't get so dramatic like a child thinking he is being "So negative" simply because he said no.

Just because of your outrage, I voted more. Amuse me further with your funny replies.

IF you voted no because of his outrage it dumb. don't vote no on something that you agree with IF you agree with the option for shields then vote yes don't just vote no because of the outrage its really stupid. its ok IF you do not agree with it thats ok to vote no all you are doing by voting no for outrage is hurting what you agree upon. I'm not saying you do agree with it I already said IF you do agree with it key word IF.

datAssassin2018
10-17-2018, 02:15 PM
This is an overreaction to someone's comment.

He voted no because doesnt want that option. That is what the poll asks for, it isn't talking about everyone, it is talking about if YOU want the option. He doesnt want it. Just believe he likes the way a shield looks doesnt mean he wants to use it. Don't get so dramatic like a child thinking he is being "So negative" simply because he said no.

Just because of your outrage, I voted more. Amuse me further with your funny replies.

If you read further down you can see that I'm completely fine with his opinion/vote.
This poll also asks whether you think shields were important for this era and If they should give us the additional option to use one.

Let me give you an advice. If you don't like my "funny" or "childish" replies, you can simply ignore them bro. There is no need to behave like a (insert appropriate word here ;)).

MnemonicSyntax
10-17-2018, 03:56 PM
IF you voted no because of his outrage it dumb don't vote no on something that you agree with IF you agree with the option for shields then vote yes don't just vote no because of the outrage its really stupid its ok IF you do not agree with it thats ok to vote no all you are doing by voting no for outrage is hurting what you agree upon I'm not saying you do agree with it I already said IF you do agree with it key word IF.

Whoa man. Your posts sounds like you're just saying one long sentence without pausing for a breath. Make smaller sentences. Use punctuation.

Dtheawesome9010
10-17-2018, 04:02 PM
Whoa man. Your posts sounds like you're just saying one long sentence without pausing for a breath. Make smaller sentences. Use punctuation.

Oh crap thought i did my bad

MnemonicSyntax
10-17-2018, 04:44 PM
Oh crap thought i did my bad

No worries.

I appreciate you not thinking I was trying to insult you either. I just know from experience that when you post without a pause and it's a large wall of text, your eyes tend to glaze over and you can miss important information.

Dead213End
10-17-2018, 05:44 PM
If there was a game to have shields, this was it. I don't think we needed shields in Origins. When I think of Sparta, I think of the movie 300, spear and shield. And why my character is walking around with a broken spear tip is ridiculous. Anyone would have forged that baby back into a spear. Ya I get it's suppose to represent the Assassin's Blade, but a simple knife would have suffice. I don't think anyone cares as long as we have our stealth kills. I'm not sure who got to make these decisions, but I think they dropped the ball on this one. I think if they wouldn't have given us shields in Origins, we would probably be less confused with Ubisoft's decision making here.

robertthebard
10-17-2018, 06:16 PM
I don't dislike the dodge mechanic in odyssey but it's just the era, I feel they could have given players the option to use shield or not. This would have pleased many more players and surely have only had a more positive effect.


There are plenty of facts that mercenaries used shields even though... throughout the whole story the protagonist is referred to as a spartan,
their mother is spartan, the father a spartan

Perhaps someone from Ubisoft can shine some light on when development started for Odyssey. I just know that just over 11 months had passed between the release of origins and odyssey.

I know that the whole reason developers make games is to make a profit. Yes it fulfils the dreams of players by giving them worlds to explore but the main reason is to please the companies board of directors. Shares fall if profit isn't made and that doesn't make for a happy CEO. It would be only in the best interest of the company to give players what they want, which in turn shows in the sales figures. There's a reason why companies like Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Insomniac and Nintendo, succeed greatly because this is what they do. Please players by giving them what they want.

Take GTA V for example, it sold 11.2 million units in the first 24 hours. Ubisoft could equal that success if they just gave fans what they want.

If we're going to stick with your spoiler, then Kassandra not trained with a shield makes perfect sense, considering it would be historically accurate, right? Are shields integral to Spartan dance training, or gymnastics? Taking the timeline into consideration, with the age of either when we see them in flashbacks, it makes sense for both that they aren't classically trained as Spartans, unless Markos is an undercover Spartan trainer? I'm an American because I'm from America. Alex and Kass are Spartans because they're from Sparta, even though they weren't raised there.

Regarding the GTA comment, no, they couldn't, because they couldn't make a game that gives the fans what they want, because the fanbase is way too divided about what they want. If this were just a reskin of AC 1, I wouldn't have bought it. I wouldn't have bought a reskin of AC 2 either, because the format was getting stale, along with over saturation of the annual release schedule. Some fans want that too. So which fans are going to give those sales numbers? If you gain 100k here, but lose 100k because of (insert design choice here), there is no net gain. You just get a different group of people unhappy.

Hoosiers513
10-17-2018, 07:58 PM
I think the point is misunderstood here, there are many players who wanted to don a shield/spear or shield/sword etc... considering the era odyssey is set in. Ubisoft have shields in the game just without the protagonists ability to utilise them. I also think that you have misconstrued hate for disappointment which is clearly felt by many players here who want Ubisoft to listen, take on board this feedback and act on it.

Odyssey really isn't assassin's creed but that's a story for another day. At this current time there aren't many new releases and odyssey fills the gap between other releases. You touched on the topic of advertising. For me personally, I didn't search for it because I had faith it was going to be as good as if not better than origins, I was left disappointed. The only advertising I saw was a 15 second cinematic clip on TV. I guess I could take partial blame for that however, I am not entirely dissatisfied just disappointed. The dialogue is lacking a lot in terms of conversation flow and some choices result in the same outcome irrelevant of the choice you make. The game clearly tries to squeeze gameplay time by deliberately sending you on a quest that's as far away from your location as possible.

There are business practices conducted by Ubisoft which are frowned upon by gamers. Releasing a game that is titled something and then not receiving stated game then placing what should have been included in the actual game behind a pay wall. Which Ubisoft have kindly done. The first DLC "Legacy of the first blade" promises to give a back story on the assassin's. This kind of content should have been in the main game considering the title.

Ubisoft may as well have given it a new title and there wouldn't have been many complaints. Remove animus sections and call it something like The Lost mercenary of Sparta, and no one would have questioned. Instead they decided to use a brand but sell players a story with very little connection to the title.

I can't emphasise enough that my presence here isn't to hate on Ubisoft but voice my personal opinion. I have, in the past been an avid fan of Ubisoft games from splinter cell to Prince of Persia. I just feel that this is it for Assassin's Creed for me personally.

I'm all for respectfully voicing your opinion and concerns. That's the greatest thing about this forum, providing feedback for the dev team so they can implement improvements to the game based on community feedback. You may fall more into the latter category I mentioned about making suggestions and wanting your voice heard and not just being an Ubi hater. But I've seen many others who's only purpose for posting on these forums seems to just be bashing everything about Ubisoft and the game, in a non-constructive way. Video games are as subjective as anything, not everyone is always going to like them. Very few games are perfect, and I understand the hatred against micro-transactions. For me at least, I feel this game's MT's are much more harmless than most and nothing in the store feels like it's essential for me to complete the game or make me unable to enjoy the game without them.

I definitely see your point about how it could've tied in more with what is considered to be the actual "Assassins" in the base game and how some may not even consider it an Assassin's Creed game. But at this point, the lore is so convoluted and confused, it's hard to tell what even really constitutes an Assassin's Creed game. Black Flag and Origins are largely spent playing as a character who's not even actually an Assassin for most of it. Sure Origins is how they came to be, so it's a little more understandable. But in Rogue you don't even play as an Assassin at all, you're a Templar! I think it's still valid to be considered AC since you still have the carry over of Layla and new elements (albeit, very few) added to the modern day story. You still have an Animus, and the Isu, and I think enough "traditional" AC elements that it can still be considered an AC game (very, very loosely considered).

My main point is that if you want to avoid disappointment, read reviews before games come out, try to get an idea of what you're buying before you spend $60. These games are so expensive now that it's way too risky, for me, to not at least have an idea of what I'm getting before shelling out the cash. Just assuming something will be good is a pretty good way to be let down. I'm sure if I was in your shoes and didn't know what to expect, I may have been much more shocked and/or disappointed. Knowing about it before hand, I actually wasn't that mad about a lot of the changes. If you do end up disappointed, I'd just like to see more people take a constructive approach like yours instead of just posting on every. single. thread. about how much they hate this game, how evil Ubi is, and how they hate they're fans because I really don't think that's true.

roflmfaoo
10-17-2018, 10:38 PM
I'm all for respectfully voicing your opinion and concerns. That's the greatest thing about this forum, providing feedback for the dev team so they can implement improvements to the game based on community feedback. You may fall more into the latter category I mentioned about making suggestions and wanting your voice heard and not just being an Ubi hater. But I've seen many others who's only purpose for posting on these forums seems to just be bashing everything about Ubisoft and the game, in a non-constructive way. Video games are as subjective as anything, not everyone is always going to like them. Very few games are perfect, and I understand the hatred against micro-transactions. For me at least, I feel this game's MT's are much more harmless than most and nothing in the store feels like it's essential for me to complete the game or make me unable to enjoy the game without them.

I definitely see your point about how it could've tied in more with what is considered to be the actual "Assassins" in the base game and how some may not even consider it an Assassin's Creed game. But at this point, the lore is so convoluted and confused, it's hard to tell what even really constitutes an Assassin's Creed game. Black Flag and Origins are largely spent playing as a character who's not even actually an Assassin for most of it. Sure Origins is how they came to be, so it's a little more understandable. But in Rogue you don't even play as an Assassin at all, you're a Templar! I think it's still valid to be considered AC since you still have the carry over of Layla and new elements (albeit, very few) added to the modern day story. You still have an Animus, and the Isu, and I think enough "traditional" AC elements that it can still be considered an AC game (very, very loosely considered).

My main point is that if you want to avoid disappointment, read reviews before games come out, try to get an idea of what you're buying before you spend $60. These games are so expensive now that it's way too risky, for me, to not at least have an idea of what I'm getting before shelling out the cash. Just assuming something will be good is a pretty good way to be let down. I'm sure if I was in your shoes and didn't know what to expect, I may have been much more shocked and/or disappointed. Knowing about it before hand, I actually wasn't that mad about a lot of the changes. If you do end up disappointed, I'd just like to see more people take a constructive approach like yours instead of just posting on every. single. thread. about how much they hate this game, how evil Ubi is, and how they hate they're fans because I really don't think that's true.

I agree with you, the forum is best used to voice opinions so that Ubisoft can take back feedback from players to better their games in a constructive way. I am by no means hating on Ubisoft, I've enjoyed many games by them in the past and can most likely say I will enjoy them in the future. I tend to stay away from reviews because many news media outlets/game review sites tend to be biased pretty much like watching many trailers about a film, it's horrible when they show the best parts of the film in the trailer.

On top of that I felt this time review hunting wasn't warranted based on the strengths of origins which I thoroughly enjoyed. The biggest let down for me by far was the game breaking bug which prevented progress. This in its own right violates consumer rights as it constitutes unfit for purpose. I did not pursue this for obvious reasons.

I'm still playing, I've reached level 50 and have many more quests to do and maybe I will be surprised.

AmbraVale
10-17-2018, 11:32 PM
Ofcourse jealous every time i see spartan with that shield. Want to be a true spartan altough this is game about assasins.

Dtheawesome9010
10-18-2018, 01:06 PM
No worries.

I appreciate you not thinking I was trying to insult you either. I just know from experience that when you post without a pause and it's a large wall of text, your eyes tend to glaze over and you can miss important information.

yea I get it also cut me some slack with the walls of text.