PDA

View Full Version : Who believes that AC odyssey need improvements???



M4nuel214
07-01-2018, 06:45 PM
Once there's still time for AC odyssey to be released should we tell Unisoft what we want to change in the game
My opinion is :
• Ok that there's not a hidden blade but there shouldn't be different Endings for the story once assassin's creed is supposed to be a kind of a historical game and not a fictional with different Endings .
• Also I believe that the fact of selecting what to say it's not that good cause it looks like other games
• LAST AND MOST IMPORTANT ( for me ) I would really love if Unisoft gave as the option in the HUD menu to turn on/off a mini map , the game itself won't have a mini map from the beginning but you could select later to have

Your opinions???

OxIdOAC
07-01-2018, 09:57 PM
...or do we need AC Odyssey at all?

MnemonicSyntax
07-01-2018, 10:27 PM
Once there's still time for AC odyssey to be released should we tell Unisoft what we want to change in the game
My opinion is :
• Ok that there's not a hidden blade but there shouldn't be different Endings for the story once assassin's creed is supposed to be a kind of a historical game and not a fictional with different Endings .
• Also I believe that the fact of selecting what to say it's not that good cause it looks like other games
• LAST AND MOST IMPORTANT ( for me ) I would really love if Unisoft gave as the option in the HUD menu to turn on/off a mini map , the game itself won't have a mini map from the beginning but you could select later to have

Your opinions???

I think none of this matters because we don't know how extensive it goes. Or if there's any sort of reasoning behind it. A "game ending" could just be you saved someone on a side quest that you didn't skip and therefore they showed up at the end to celebrate.

Chrono Trigger had dozens of different endings and some of them were just minor character swaps based on what you did or didn't do. Others were more dynamic with a drastic change. Who knows what Ubisoft has up it's sleeve.

As for the map thing, that won't happen. Senu (and Ikaros) are designed to negate the need for a mini-map.


...or do we need AC Odyssey at all?

I do. There are others too. You're free to not play it if you don't want to.

I don't get posts like these. If you're not happy with the direction Odyssey is going, don't buy it. Pretty cut and dry. Suggesting it should be cancelled because you don't like it is pretty selfish.

crusader_prophet
07-02-2018, 12:23 AM
...or do we need AC Odyssey at all?

Just because you do not like eating at generic McDonald's or Burger King or Walmart food court because you hate the food quality they make and also concerned with the growing obesity amongst consumers, does not mean that they are going to shut down. They will keep making unhealthy low quality food as long as it hits off the checkboxes with seemingly attractive meal deals. Only few know about and are able to afford and appreciate Mirazur (Chef Mauro Colagreco) or Eleven Madison Park (Chef Daniel Humm).

MnemonicSyntax
07-02-2018, 12:43 AM
Just because you do not like eating at generic McDonald's or Burger King or Walmart food court because you hate the food quality they make and also concerned with the growing obesity amongst consumers, does not mean that they are going to shut down. They will keep making unhealthy low quality food as long as it hits off the checkboxes with seemingly attractive meal deals. Only few know about and are able to afford and appreciate Mirazur (Chef Mauro Colagreco) or Eleven Madison Park (Chef Daniel Humm).

Careful you don't drop scraps of all that pretentious cuisine on us ignorant fatties below.

Slimgrin
07-02-2018, 01:22 AM
I'm concerned with how rough and awkward the combat looks. Mainly the animations:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DrbvmVvgrw&feature=push-fr&attr_tag=uhSwWdL-ejdhiBr2-6

I know the game isn't finished, but when they first showed Origins it looked way smoother than this. Also, facial animations during conversations don't look great either. If this game really needs a few more months in the oven, Ubisoft should give the team all the time they need. Rushing another disaster like Unity out the door would be a huge mistake.

Frag_Maniac
07-02-2018, 03:36 AM
This game has been in development for some time, alongside Origins. So it's very unlikely they will completely change it and pull out the varied outcomes and dialog options. That would mean wasting a lot of content already created, which took a lot of time and money to make, and they'd be upsetting those whom wanted such RPG features whom have already been shown and promised it.

I do agree with you though that neither of those features fit the AC theme. They've totally changed the style of the game. Plus I agree with slipster that the animations and facial expressions look noticeably worse than Origins when it was first shown. l'm not sure there's much hope they'll be polished enough in the time left either. This reminds me of the botched Mass Effect Andromeda launch.

Swailing
07-02-2018, 05:38 PM
Once there's still time for AC odyssey to be released should we tell Unisoft what we want to change in the game
My opinion is :
• Ok that there's not a hidden blade but there shouldn't be different Endings for the story once assassin's creed is supposed to be a kind of a historical game and not a fictional with different Endings .

Assassin's Creed has always given you fixed history, fanciful 'history', and a fictional meta-story on top. And it's always been different depending on what you chose to do. As a completionist, I've seen tons of story that most players never did. And even mission by mission, we've all done wildly different things that other players never imagined doing. From the beginning, the game has always made it clear that synchronisation is a moving target and every Animus user is bending the "real" reality of the ancestor considerably. So now we get that freedom in the story too (within strict limits!).

History will still be history (although, remember AC1 when Desmond pointed out historical discrepancies, and Vidic said the Templars change the history books to hide the truth about some things?).


• Also I believe that the fact of selecting what to say it's not that good cause it looks like other games

Assassin's Creed already looks a lot like other games (and vice versa). I am very interested to see where dialogue choices can take the game. I think it's going to become a hugely important gameplay mechanic.

There are lots of times in every AC where I've felt moments of frustration at the "on rails" parts. I've felt like the assassin's story decisions don't make sense with how I've been playing the game, or that their reactions seem inappropriate to how I'm handling things. Sometimes it's like an intrusion from somebody else's experience, and then I regain control. Dialogue options will help a lot with that.

But the biggest thing for me is that dialogue choices have the potential to make AC more... assassiny :) The best interactive dialogue in games includes quite subtle queues that not everybody will pick up, and the potential for the player to manipulate characters into doing what they want. These things should be part of the assassin's toolkit.

In the next couple of years, I'm hoping that rather than simply uncovering a vipers' nest of political skulduggery, we will actually be able to tug the strings of that power for ourselves. This could be the best thing to happen to the series is a long time — maybe not in Odyssey itself, but in later games coming down the pipe.


• LAST AND MOST IMPORTANT ( for me ) I would really love if Unisoft gave as the option in the HUD menu to turn on/off a mini map , the game itself won't have a mini map from the beginning but you could select later to have

Your opinions???

I am happy the minimap is gone. It's redundant, and in many ways makes the gameplay less fun if it's always revealing snags in the urban plan or the positions of enemies.

kissybyc
07-05-2018, 05:17 PM
I know the game isn't finished, but when they first showed Origins it looked way smoother than this. Also, facial animations during conversations don't look great either. If this game really needs a few more months in the oven, Ubisoft should give the team all the time they need. Rushing another disaster like Unity out the door would be a huge mistake.

Origin's better facial animations come at the price of having fewer of them. It appears to me that Origin uses almost entirely mo-capped cutscenes, and the less important dialogues just have that boring over-the-shoulder camera. From what we've seen so far, Odyssey seems to use cinematic camera angle for all conversations, which means a lot of facial animations will be algorithm-based instead of mo-capped. A little stiffness is expected. I'd choose cinematic camera angle with algorithm-based animations over over-the-shoulder camera any day.

Mynameisshhhhh7
07-08-2018, 04:27 PM
Crusaderprophet, you’re a patronising ****, but man that was ****ing funny!,

OxIdOAC
07-08-2018, 08:18 PM
It was supposed to be SARCASM, but you youngsters didn't learn this word in your school YET... Easy kids, you're give yourself acne prone skin...

Black_Widow9
07-08-2018, 10:30 PM
:rolleyes::rolleyes: It is possible to have a discussion without insulting each other. I suggest everyone learn how to do so.

timpbader
07-12-2018, 11:23 AM
No hidden blade is a slap in the face to their long time players who have bought these games year after year.

joelsantos24
07-12-2018, 01:03 PM
I'm concerned with how rough and awkward the combat looks. Mainly the animations:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DrbvmVvgrw&feature=push-fr&attr_tag=uhSwWdL-ejdhiBr2-6

I know the game isn't finished, but when they first showed Origins it looked way smoother than this. Also, facial animations during conversations don't look great either. If this game really needs a few more months in the oven, Ubisoft should give the team all the time they need. Rushing another disaster like Unity out the door would be a huge mistake.
I was thinking the same thing. The character animations look eerily awkward. I wouldn't say it's as bad as Mass Effect Andromeda, but still...

Anyway, I generally agree, Origins looked much more polished.


This game has been in development for some time, alongside Origins. So it's very unlikely they will completely change it and pull out the varied outcomes and dialog options. That would mean wasting a lot of content already created, which took a lot of time and money to make, and they'd be upsetting those whom wanted such RPG features whom have already been shown and promised it.

I do agree with you though that neither of those features fit the AC theme. They've totally changed the style of the game. Plus I agree with slipster that the animations and facial expressions look noticeably worse than Origins when it was first shown. l'm not sure there's much hope they'll be polished enough in the time left either. This reminds me of the botched Mass Effect Andromeda launch.
Exactly. It's one of the major problems with the series. Seldom do they have any margin to absorb any ideas or criticism from the fans. Their mass production system also makes it increasingly difficult to perceive what works and what doesn't, as well as what is considered popular or appealing and what isn't. Odyssey hasn't even been released yet, but we already know that the next game is already in an advanced state of production.


Assassin's Creed has always given you fixed history, fanciful 'history', and a fictional meta-story on top. And it's always been different depending on what you chose to do. As a completionist, I've seen tons of story that most players never did. And even mission by mission, we've all done wildly different things that other players never imagined doing. From the beginning, the game has always made it clear that synchronisation is a moving target and every Animus user is bending the "real" reality of the ancestor considerably. So now we get that freedom in the story too (within strict limits!).
You never really had much to choose from, in the first place. You always had objectives, and during many instalments of the series, you even had specific directives on how to achieve full synchronisation status. Moreover, the events of the series were always shaped in order to fit historical events, not the other way around.

Additionally, what's this about "bending reality"? As far as we, the players, are concerned, we're moving the character, but from the perspective of the characters plugged into the Animus, they're merely observing history and watching their ancestors across their respective memories. I remember Desmond, during a Bleeding Effect in AC2, accessing a memory where Altaïr was following a target in Acre. Later on in the memory, that supposed target turned out to be Maria Thorpe, and Desmond learnt that they were lovers. Near the end of the memory, he didn't leave or remain with Altaïr, for that matter, but he was stuck with Maria, so to speak. He had no control. He followed the memory.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGC3utBQ50Y

MageAquarius20
07-16-2018, 06:16 PM
Well Oddessey can't really improve as it is a AC Origins copy cat with no real innovation behind it, it's after all made by the same team that made AC Unity, so there is that.

One thing i would fix is adding a persona system into it, to allow for more variety

another would be cutting either Alexios or Kassandra out, the option to play both is useless and only exist because Ubisoft can't make a Female character the main hero without a Male Protagonist to balance it out like with Aya and Bayek.

lastly would i just cancel this game, it looks unpolished and unnessesary.

MnemonicSyntax
07-16-2018, 06:56 PM
lastly would i just cancel this game, it looks unpolished and unnessesary.

Just don't buy it then. Cancelling it because you don't like it is selfish.

AnimusLover
07-17-2018, 12:30 AM
Well Oddessey can't really improve as it is a AC Origins copy cat with no real innovation behind it, it's after all made by the same team that made AC Unity, so there is that.

Actually, it's the team that made Syndicate which greatly improved on Unity...


another would be cutting either Alexios or Kassandra out, the option to play both is useless and only exist because Ubisoft can't make a Female character the main hero without a Male Protagonist to balance it out like with Aya and Bayek.

I agree with you but it's too late. Marketing has promised the option.


lastly would i just cancel this game, it looks unpolished and unnessesary.

Why? They're going to make money from it so what incentive is there to cancel the game other than to please you?

TeaBagHitter
07-17-2018, 03:09 PM
I agree with you but it's too late. Marketing has promised the option.

I saw in one of the threads someone proposing there would be a canon mode where there is either a whole new mode where you are kassandra and no dialogue options, you are forced to follow the canon story, or another idea (which seems better imo) where they highlight the canon dialogue options or put some icon next to it marking these options as canon if anyone would like to follow the canon story solely without freedom of choice. That would pretty much solve the debate around this i guess

AnimusLover
07-17-2018, 06:00 PM
I saw in one of the threads someone proposing there would be a canon mode where there is either a whole new mode where you are kassandra and no dialogue options, you are forced to follow the canon story, or another idea (which seems better imo) where they highlight the canon dialogue options or put some icon next to it marking these options as canon if anyone would like to follow the canon story solely without freedom of choice. That would pretty much solve the debate around this i guess

That's not what Aquarius wants though. He/she wants one of the characters removed entirely regardless of whether there are modes dedicated to it or not. He/she would cancel the game if they could. :rolleyes:

MageAquarius20
07-17-2018, 09:14 PM
Mnenmonic Sytax

Just don't buy it then. Cancelling it because you don't like it is selfish.

I never said i would buy it or not, my impression on the game is just low, if it does turn out well, i will take back what i said. And i don't see how trying to imrpove thier games is selfish here, so what do you mean by that? Cancelling it would actually be selfless, since it would save a lot of ressources and time for Ubisoft to make such a game, plus seeing what they made wrong is the best way for them to evolve. why accusing me of Egotism here?

AnimusLover
07-17-2018, 09:29 PM
I never said i would buy it or not, my impression on the game is just low, if it does turn out well, i will take back what i said. And i don't see how trying to imrpove thier games is selfish here, so what do you mean by that? Cancelling it would actually be selfless, since it would save a lot of ressources and time for Ubisoft to make such a game, plus seeing what they made wrong is the best way for them to evolve. why accusing me of Egotism here?

Are you for real? They've already spent time and resources on the game so cancelling it would be a total waste of that...

MageAquarius20
07-17-2018, 11:38 PM
I saw in one of the threads someone proposing there would be a canon mode where there is either a whole new mode where you are kassandra and no dialogue options, you are forced to follow the canon story, or another idea (which seems better imo) where they highlight the canon dialogue options or put some icon next to it marking these options as canon if anyone would like to follow the canon story solely without freedom of choice. That would pretty much solve the debate around this i guess

Can you give me the link to it? It sounds interesting? That could be acceptable i guess, but it still boils down if said options are good.

regardless, i am still no fan of the dialogue, there is not much justification to it lorewise. It would make more sense if it was just Leyla choosing these options rather than Kassandra/Alexios.

To AnimusLover: Please, i am merely doing my job, being a good customer telling how i want my product and i am not the only one who is doing it, a lot of people are critical of this game for similiar reasons, no need to attack harsh/Good Criticism, which is what Ubisoft needs. If you are still angry about our previous debate and the fact that you were wrong, then honestly i am not going to waste my time arguing with you until we can make a truce here. This is getting ridiculous.

MnemonicSyntax
07-18-2018, 03:26 AM
Can you give me the link to it? It sounds interesting? That could be acceptable i guess, but it still boils down if said options are good.

regardless, i am still no fan of the dialogue, there is not much justification to it lorewise. It would make more sense if it was just Leyla choosing these options rather than Kassandra/Alexios.

To AnimusLover: Please, i am merely doing my job, being a good customer telling how i want my product and i am not the only one who is doing it, a lot of people are critical of this game for similiar reasons, no need to attack harsh/Good Criticism, which is what Ubisoft needs. If you are still angry about our previous debate and the fact that you were wrong, then honestly i am not going to waste my time arguing with you until we can make a truce here. This is getting ridiculous.

But you're not being a "good customer" by making threads and posts about how you are confident that Odyssey will fail.

Your criticism isn't good in any sense of the word because you aren't talking about ways to improve it, instead saying things like "it should just cancelled" isn't positive OR conducive to bringing about change.

Lastly, you are ridiculously rude to other people (talking about how "lore" can be disproven by a child for example) when on multiple occasions your interpretation of the lore is not only vastly skewed but completely incorrect at times.

You also put words in people's mouths. I never said you were egotistical. I just said wanting to have a game cancelled because you don't like it instead of just of not buying it is selfish. And it is. If Odyssey isn't for you, then don't buy it.

Saying Ubisoft should cancel it is NOT positive and isn't helping anything and is in fact extremely negative.

aggeaf
07-20-2018, 12:43 PM
First of all where are the shields.... embarrassing that they cut this out from the game. I also believe that is why the combat looks so clunky, look how much he rolls and runs away from the enemy. I don’t even want to imagine close quarters combat with this and don’t even get me started on the combat animations and facial animations. You had one more year than origins but somehow you are able to take away features and make the animations look worse. Ubisoft should just close this Quebec studio they always seem to be the ones that **** it up.

joelsantos24
07-20-2018, 01:53 PM
First of all where are the shields.... embarrassing that they cut this out from the game. I also believe that is why the combat looks so clunky, look how much he rolls and runs away from the enemy. I don’t even want to imagine close quarters combat with this and don’t even get me started on the combat animations and facial animations. You had one more year than origins but somehow you are able to take away features and make the animations look worse. Ubisoft should just close this Quebec studio they always seem to be the ones that **** it up.
Yes, the animations look pretty bad. There isn't really an explanation for it, so I think I'm not even going to delve into that. From what I've seen, it's really depressing.

As for the shield controversy, it's absolutely unacceptable, for a greek warrior/soldier not to have or carry a shield. It's pointless, to try to explain or justify these types of decisions from Ubisoft. Go figure.

AmaterasuCALI
07-22-2018, 02:41 AM
they need to add flying mounts like pegasus and griffin. MORE MYTHOLOGY AND FANTASY . WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE GODDESS OF LOVE HERSELF MISS APHRODITE. ac is already rated M so Aphrodite would be fine

MnemonicSyntax
07-22-2018, 06:49 AM
they need to add flying mounts like pegasus and griffin. MORE MYTHOLOGY AND FANTASY . WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE GODDESS OF LOVE HERSELF MISS APHRODITE. ac is already rated M so Aphrodite would be fine

There's no need to spam this in multiple threads.

That being said, Aphrodite is an Isu, also known as Venus. She could very well make an appearance or at least a mention considering the Isu were around this time period.

MageAquarius20
07-29-2018, 08:16 PM
The Problem with the Shield was like with most people is that it has no Assassin feeling to it. When Origins came out, it caused a rift in the franshise, because most people couldn't decide if this was an AC game or a new IP with a AC brand on it, simirly with AC Origins.....ohhhh.

I think the devs wanted to make it a lot more familiar to AC fans, so that the identity of the franshise doesn't seem to vague, but the damage is already done. It would have been better with an persona system to make the game look more AC, like for instance a Assassin persona as default for stealth and fighting in AC type of combat, where as the Hoplite persona is for open battles and naval combat and the Philosopher is for discussions ( in a Ace attoney sort of style or even like the Original fallout, like for instace the debate with the master)as a new mechanic to make the game more interesing. because they took too many freedoms with this game.




To synch: Nope, this game already dissapointed too many AC fans and made too many mistakes for it's adversiting like the true identity of the main Hero, in order to look promising. Cancelling it would be altruistic, because a true fan or even dev of a AC game should care about the Lore and the fans wouldn't have done what they did with Oddessey, if they can't even do that right, why even make AC games? cancelling it would be like what desmond did in Ac 3 and maybe that's what ubisoft needs, people who care, like me and Joel.

MnemonicSyntax
07-29-2018, 08:24 PM
To synch: Nope, this game already dissapointed too many AC fans and made too many mistakes for it's adversiting like the true identity of the main Hero, in order to look promising. Cancelling it would be altruistic, because a true fan or even dev of a AC game should care about the Lore and the fans wouldn't have done what they did with Oddessey, if they can't even do that right, why even make AC games? cancelling it would be like what desmond did in Ac 3 and maybe that's what ubisoft needs, people who care, like me and Joel.

I'd be inclined to agree with you if you managed to get even half of what you think is the lore correct instead of your own interpretation.

Really tired of having people speak for the so-called "true fans" when they themselves don't even get it right.

As for advertisements, this has been discussed before. The book is canon for Kassandra. It does not mean the game is not canon for Alexios. Books have these things see, called plots and twists to them, different narratives and points of view.

Just because "Kassandra is the canon character in the book" doesn't mean a thing if you don't actually read the book and know for certain what goes on in the game.

joelsantos24
07-30-2018, 01:59 PM
The book is canonical. The game may not be, depending on the choices made. Kassandra isn't just the canonical character in the book. Kassandra is the canonical character, period. Alexios doesn't exist. This may confuse certain minds, but there's an insurmountable and inescapable difference.

MnemonicSyntax
07-30-2018, 06:23 PM
The book is canonical. The game may not be, depending on the choices made. Kassandra isn't just the canonical character in the book. Kassandra is the canonical character, period. Alexios doesn't exist. This may confuse certain minds, but there's an insurmountable and inescapable difference.

Have you read it?

No, you haven't. Until you do, the thinly-veiled insults (confusing certain minds) can kindly stop.

cawatrooper9
07-30-2018, 07:56 PM
I'm still not convinced that the book necessarily means that Alexios isn't canonical.

You could say that Haytham is the canonical protagonist of Forsaken, but that doesn't mean that Connor doesn't exist.

Unless the book is meant to be a direct canon retelling of the game, I think it's still possible that Alexios is just as canon as Kass right now.

Petrolea
07-30-2018, 10:45 PM
A bit late to start weighing in I suppose, but I've not really had time to delve into the source material so I didn't want to formulate an opinion yet.

This game looks to be much like Origins, and I'm honestly not entirely sure what I think of that. I get it from the studio's perspective, it's a lot easier to build multiple games with the same engine, not to mention that these games are years in the making so when we started playing Origins, there was probably quite a bit of work done on Odyssey already. And I do feel that the devs took community responses into account with this game, as far as that was possible when a game is already partially developed. For example: I'm also a bit confused as to the whole no shields thing, but perhaps we'll be able to later on in the game, I don't know. Fact is that many fans complained about the shields in Origins, saying it broke the "AC vibe". Personally that didn't bother me so much as the change in gameplay, but an option to toggle shields would probably be better for this game than removing them entirely (because of historical accuracy). I don't know if such an option is still possible to insert from a developer's perspective.
The feedback I gave on Origins, which I'd hoped would be taken into the next game, is that I miss 'classic' eagle vision (the grey/blue tones with coloured 'tagging' of NPCs). Then again this game was already in the making, and it was probably too short notice to change that even if they wanted to. That said I still hope it'll make a reappearance in a future game.

I like the ability to choose a male or female character, and I like that the gameplay won't be noticeably different based on that choice alone (though character responses varying does sound good and I don't think it'd be believeable in this culture for responses to be the same towards a male or female character, depending on the situation). I liked being able to play as a woman in Origins, but found Aya clumsy to manouvre in comparison to Bayek, and the forced weapon/fighting style didn't fit the style I'd so far developed as Bayek, leading to a lot of frustrations in those segments. However I also greatly enjoyed the differences between Evie and Jacob, but that was particularly useful (and fun to experience) as you could switch between the two. As we can't switch between Alexios and Kassandra, I think it's for the best that won't have too much of an impact on gameplay. And we can influence gameplay ourselves through the presonality we attribute to our chosen character with the dialogue options. I've rather enjoyed the wide range of personalities our characters in the franchise have had so far, and I'm a little sad I won't get to experience what the team would come up with for this game, but I'm also interested to see how a story turns out when I'm more acitvely 'at the wheel'.
And I've not played it yet, obviously, but I do think it looks great. As people have remarked before, yes the facial expressions are more stiff than in Origins, but there's a lot more of them and the game still has to run on commercially available video cards. Not to mention the additional cost of going for something like mo-cap, which would have to be put back to the purchase price for us (because yes Ubisoft is a company and they need to make a profit, that's how the world works). Also, it's not completely finished yet, and we don't know when the section they used for the gameplay at E3 and such was developed, I would imagine they got that ready weeks if not months in advance. Maybe it will look more like Origins in the finished product.

My main point of concern, that I've had ever since the first trailers came out, is the time period. I love ancient Greece, and I'm sure I'll love the immersion. However, making an ORIGINS story and then skipping further back by several centuries is incredibly illogical to me. I'm curious how they're going to relate this game to the franchise, and of course the Isu were around way earlier than this (and seeing as the Spear is confirmed to be a PoE, there will definitely be a relation to that), but how can it be an Assassin's Creed game without Assassins... I'm worried how this'll play out but also willing to give them a shot. On a related notion: I've seen people complain about the lack of hidden blades (calling it a slap in the face of 'real' fans even), but honestly I would have been more annoyed if these characters, who are by definition not assassins, DID have them. So I am in support of that aspect of the design (and I've played all games since the first came out, and replay regularly, so yeah I do consider myself a 'real' fan, if there even is such a thing).

I'm buying the game, because it does look entertaining, but I will admit that as I'm going into it I'm considering Origins and Odyssey a seperate, but related series. I missed what I consider the 'classical' AC feel in Origins, and I don't think I'll get it back with this game. However I did enjoy Origins and I think going into it with an open mind I will enjoy Odyssey as well.

I'll give that advice to everyone who's piling on the hate here: If you go in expecting to hate it, you will. If you at least try to go into it with an open mind, it may still not be what you were hoping for, but it can still be an incredibly enjoyable experience. So if you've got nothing nice to say about it now, keep your money in your wallet, maybe wait for some reviews to come out in the first month or so and re-evaluate. And maybe just buy a different game, if you don't change your mind. But regardless of that, you can be negative all you want but if you can't be constructive, maybe the best thing for
everyone would be to keep it to yourself.
There's a whole team of people who've worked on this game for years, who poured their hearts into this and who are dedicated to bringing us a great game. There is absolutely no reason for you to stomp all over their hard work. You wouldn't like it if the roles were reversed, so I suggest you dial it down and convey your concerns in a civilised manner.
And now that I'm officially sounding like my mother, I think I'll leave off here.

AnimusLover
07-31-2018, 12:20 AM
I'm still not convinced that the book necessarily means that Alexios isn't canonical.

You could say that Haytham is the canonical protagonist of Forsaken, but that doesn't mean that Connor doesn't exist.

Unless the book is meant to be a direct canon retelling of the game, I think it's still possible that Alexios is just as canon as Kass right now.

I'm the same. I theorise that Alexios is canonical (mainly because of a spoiler/leak I read about the child who is thrown off the cliff being the antagonist) but I think the game's real protagnoist is Kassandra.

I feel like I need this game to just come out so we can all stop bickering over hypotheticals and move on to bickering about what we've actually played and read. At least that will be progress LOL

cawatrooper9
07-31-2018, 02:22 PM
I'm the same. I theorise that Alexios is canonical (mainly because of a spoiler/leak I read about the child who is thrown off the cliff being the antagonist) but I think the game's real protagnoist is Kassandra.


That's a good point. There's also


The fact that the Spear has two distinct DNA strands in it. How would Alexios and Kass both have their DNA in it, if one wasn't even canonical?



I feel like I need this game to just come out so we can all stop bickering over hypotheticals and move on to bickering about what we've actually played and read. At least that will be progress LOL

That's the dream.
Just 66 days to go!

joelsantos24
07-31-2018, 02:45 PM
I'm still not convinced that the book necessarily means that Alexios isn't canonical.

You could say that Haytham is the canonical protagonist of Forsaken, but that doesn't mean that Connor doesn't exist.

Unless the book is meant to be a direct canon retelling of the game, I think it's still possible that Alexios is just as canon as Kass right now.
You're comparing two very distinct, and essentially, unrelated contexts.

According to the series' mythology, Haytham is Conor's father. We all know that. But Forsaken was Haytham's personal journal, as I recall, and it's actually written in the first person. So, the book is fundamentally a record of his own personal experiences, not a recollection of all the events from AC3. In Odyssey, we know that Kassandra existed and Alexios didn't. The developers have already admitted that the book will follow the life of Kassandra, and therefore, portray the canonical structure of Odyssey's events.

cawatrooper9
07-31-2018, 03:00 PM
You're comparing two very distinct contexts. The Alexios vs. Kassandra situation doesn't even compare to Haytham's vs. Conor's.

According to the series' mythology, Haytham is Conor's father. We all know that. But Forsaken was Haytham's personal journal, as I recall, and it's actually written in the first person. So, the book is fundamentally a record of his own personal experiences, not a recollection of all the events from AC3. In Odyssey, we know that Kassandra existed and Alexios didn't. The developers have already admitted that the book will follow the life of Kassandra, and therefore, portray the canonical structure of Odyssey's events.

My point was that both novels are likely prequels.

There is one reason where this gets a little hairy though, and that's according to the official synopsis.


Greece, 5th century BCE. Kassandra is a mercenary of Spartan blood, sentenced to death by her family, cast out into exile. Now she will embark on an epic journey to become a legendary hero - and uncover the truth about her mysterious lineage

So we're seeing Kassandra as a child, which according to the trailer is likely to overlap with some elements of the game. So I could see how you're concerned with how this could present some problems.

Really though, I'm not sure we can say much for sure just how conflicting this is until we've read the book and played the game.

joelsantos24
07-31-2018, 04:13 PM
My point was that both novels are likely prequels.

There is one reason where this gets a little hairy though, and that's according to the official synopsis.



So we're seeing Kassandra as a child, which according to the trailer is likely to overlap with some elements of the game. So I could see how you're concerned with how this could present some problems.

Really though, I'm not sure we can say much for sure just how conflicting this is until we've read the book and played the game.
The books don't have to be prequels, by definition. Furthermore, why are we discussing whom or what is canonical? As I said, the developers have already disclosed that the book will portray the canonical structure of Odyssey's story. We have the game's own creative director saying it in first person (https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/8suomv/hi_im_jonathan_dumont_creative_director_of/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/8suomv/hi_im_jonathan_dumont_creative_director_of/):)):


"Yes, there will be a canon represented by the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey."

So, how is this even up for discussion? It almost seems/sounds like people are actually apprehensive about the ambiguous value of the mythology in this game, and are desperately trying to rationalise the entire problem, by giving Alexios some canonical merit. Alexios doesn't exist. I think we all have to accept that, once and for all.

cawatrooper9
07-31-2018, 04:22 PM
So, how is this even up for discussion? It almost seems/sounds like people are actually apprehensive about the ambiguous value of the mythology in this game, and are desperately trying to rationalise the entire problem, by giving Alexios some canonical merit. Alexios doesn't exist. It is what it is.

Yeah, I'm not saying Kass isn't canonical. It's that I don't think we can make the claim that Alexios isn't , even given the information we currently have. I guess I just don't see how the book being canon, when we don't even know if it covers the same events as the game, can confirm this.

And there's still absolutely a chance that he isn't canon, but I just don't know we can say that for certain now. As AnimusLover says, we pretty much just have to find out for ourselves. Cheers! :D

joelsantos24
07-31-2018, 05:04 PM
Yeah, I'm not saying Kass isn't canonical. It's that I don't think we can make the claim that Alexios isn't , even given the information we currently have. I guess I just don't see how the book being canon, when we don't even know if it covers the same events as the game, can confirm this.

And there's still absolutely a chance that he isn't canon, but I just don't know we can say that for certain now. As AnimusLover says, we pretty much just have to find out for ourselves. Cheers! :D
I'm trying to understand your point, but I'm currently not able to, in all honesty. If Kassandra is the (already confirmed) canonical protagonist of Odyssey, how can Alexios display any canonical merit, at the same time?

I believe this is somewhat related with what I previously said, about Ubisoft losing it's own ground with this series, and all in the name of changing the nature of the game into a full service RPG. In the beginning, we had the animus, and now we get animus-POE combinations, time-travelling, time and reality distortion, historical ambiguity, etc. The series lost it's balance and it's own logical and rational framework, even considering the fringe concept of genetic memory that founded it.

dxsxhxcx
07-31-2018, 05:18 PM
I'm trying to understand your point, but I'm currently not able to, in all honesty. If Kassandra is the (already confirmed) canonical protagonist of Odyssey, how can Alexios display any canonical merit, at the same time?

I believe this is somewhat related with what I previously said, about Ubisoft losing it's own ground with this series, and all in the name of changing the nature of the game into a full service RPG. In the beginning, we had the animus, and now we get animus-POE combinations, time-travelling, time and reality distortion, historical ambiguity, etc. The series lost it's balance and it's own logical and rational framework, even considering the fringe concept of genetic memory that founded it.


I'm the same. I theorise that Alexios is canonical (mainly because of a spoiler/leak I read about the child who is thrown off the cliff being the antagonist) but I think the game's real protagnoist is Kassandra.


If the leak mentioned here is true then both characters are canonical in the sense that they both existed but played different roles, the animus' new ability will allow us to change that turning into canon whatever choice we make in the game. Kassandra may have been the canonical character until Layla enters the animus and decides to change that by choosing to control Alexios instead (or making different choices than Kassandra did). What used to be canon and what wasn't doesn't matter anymore because we'll rewrite history with the animus.

joelsantos24
07-31-2018, 05:31 PM
What used to be canon and what wasn't, doesn't matter anymore because we'll rewrite history with the animus.
https://media.giphy.com/media/27EhcDHnlkw1O/giphy.gif

dxsxhxcx
07-31-2018, 06:22 PM
https://media.giphy.com/media/27EhcDHnlkw1O/giphy.gif

Wasn't this that was advertised?

RecycleUrArrows
08-01-2018, 01:11 AM
"Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path , there is no right or wrong way.."

"A" Canon. There is no right or wrong way. Implying that one of the cannon stories will be featured in the novel. Not that Alexios isn't cannon or doesn't exist.

joelsantos24
08-01-2018, 11:44 AM
"Yes there will be a canon represented in the novel. It features Kassandra and her journey. But in the game you decide your path , there is no right or wrong way.."

"A" Canon. There is no right or wrong way. Implying that one of the cannon stories will be featured in the novel. Not that Alexios isn't cannon or doesn't exist.
In my opinion, some people are interpreting facts or statements to support or feed their own desires or pre-defined conclusions. In a game that will display options, choices and multiple endings, the creative director was asked about the implications of that approach to the series' mythology and it's canonical structure. He just said that there was going to be a canon, and that this canon was going to be portrayed in the book. Saying that there is a canon, doesn't mean that there should be any emphasis on the "a". A canon, by it's own concept, means an untouchable and unmistakable truth/reality.

Facts aren't ambiguous. There can only be one canonical path. If Kassandra is the canonical character, then, by definition, it means Alexios doesn't exist. The rest of the statement about there not being a right or wrong path in the game, is Ubisoft's way to justify or excuse the inclusion of options. In the end, though, there is, obviously, a right path and a wrong path, because there is a canon.

MnemonicSyntax
08-01-2018, 06:27 PM
The irony.

My mind is just...

How many days until launch again?

AnimusLover
08-01-2018, 10:23 PM
The irony.

My mind is just...

How many days until launch again?

Too long lol

Although I have to admit all the baseless and incessant complaining over a single line written off the cuff by a creative developer who at this time cannot even clarify his comments or go into detail without entering spoiler territory ,and probably regrets saying anything about the novel at all is becoming very entertaining to watch unfold.

Longevity95405
08-02-2018, 12:31 AM
just want ACP mode on release

also hope they are retaining the two control schemes for controller (run on A or RT), or adding a full remap option

joelsantos24
08-02-2018, 11:14 AM
https://media.tenor.com/images/63e8d228000d3a25d2b27dff12d68dd5/tenor.gif

MageAquarius20
08-05-2018, 10:04 PM
They aren't "baseless" complaints, they are factual and correct statements and criticism towards the Game's adversement and it's development Philosophy. They declared a Character as the canon hero, despite not appearing in any of the main trailers and being not even in the cover at all, which makes the choice of choosing a Avatar 1)redundant and 2) pretty cowardly if they aren't able to show us a female heroine. They also removed and changed elements of the game to like the shield with no real justification as to why? when this was a thing they showed us in the trailer and it isn't the first time they did that, they did that too with the Crossbow for AC 1 and the Story for Rayman Origins, we didn't got and finally the whole Justifications they use for the Choice mechanic that ignores the lore and logic of it's own franshise being that you can Choose the dialougue due to the DNA being too old to give us some of the info, instead of saying that Leyla just build an Animus that can show alternative realities, which means that they didn't really thought that out well, there are also issues with the Game being too much like Origins and the gameplay not really being a improvement over it's predessesor, but you know them already. Declaring them baseless demands is just cowardly and a weak way to descredit Criticism that is well grounded and justified, expecially then when the counter-arguments against said criticism is baseless, like denying Kassandra being mispresented, yet coincidently being the main hero of the story, it's like making a game about a Cowbow and a Native American and declaring that the NA is the canon hero, despite most promo material and trailers showing only the Cowbow. It might not bother you, but don't act like as if they aren't justified, because they actually are and shared amongst many people regarding this game. This is my last reply to you to this matter Animus since you couldn't even understand the criticism i made here, while acting like as if we are somehow wrong, kinda like how you falsely accuse Joel of using the word Autism here.

And Synch: Please stop with this overly condensating tone here, Joel didn't do anything here. You don't have to defend the game each time someone criticisze it for valid reasons like it's terrible trailer. that's the problem i have with you. You defend the devs for nealry every overly-glaring mistake they made like the mismanaged Origins story that barely had anything to do with the Assassins Creed and thier tenets( except the don't kill innocent rule), who are just thrown there in such shallow ways, like the Hidden blade ( i mean, come on, can't they just reproduce the hidden blades from bayek, why cutting a ring finger like that?) it's almost unbelievable. It misinterpreted the Goals and ideals of the Assassins of fighting for the freedom of the people to simply being protector of the innocent, rather than to focus on freedom, after all, Bayek didn't object to the Gods ruling nor does Aya have problems with corrupt rulers like the Roman senate, so they seemingly care only about the Innocent people, no Nothing is true and everything is permitted. On top of you defendin the end product, you also defend Annulization on the grounds that it merely allows them to develop the games 4 years, while completely ignoring the fact, that Annulization makes over time the people less excited for the games they make if they come too often as well as them not being able to improve the games properly when rushing the release of the game this much. The work would become too much for single teams to handle and they would need to make diffrent teams with diffrent ideas that contradict the earlier lore like how Darby saying that they want to dial down the power of the PoE,which rougue convieniently ignored. It doesn't here matter that they work for 4 years in a game( considering Unity i kind of doubt that they work hard with their games anymore), because they are rushed to make so many games as possible to get game pro year out, making it impossible for them to think things through, unlike GoW that contrary to you took 5 years to make( source: the Dicrector) without rushing to yearly release by waiting for the game sell it's last copies and hearing the Criticism they get, that's Companies like Nitendo get most things correctly done, because they listen. So please stop being a apologist for every wrongdoing by the devs here, because you care more about Characters and the isu than the actually AC plot you admitted to be less interessted in than the First Civ, It's really getting ridicoulous here. I find it both funny, yet depressing synch that you have no points here other than making excuses everyone here already teared apar, it's the best to just let it rest, because you don't really understand what is discussed here. Ironic can't even descripe her here.

MnemonicSyntax
08-06-2018, 02:18 AM
They aren't "baseless" complaints, they are factual and correct statements and criticism towards the Game's adversement and it's development Philosophy. They declared a Character as the canon hero, despite not appearing in any of the main trailers and being not even in the cover at all, which makes the choice of choosing a Avatar 1)redundant and 2) pretty cowardly if they aren't able to show us a female heroine.

How many times does it need to be repeated? The devs who "love Kass" are not the same people as the advertising department who are most likely told by higher update to use a specific protag.


They also removed and changed elements of the game to like the shield with no real justification as to why?

Uh.. what? Shields weren't removed because they weren't in the game for the protags.


when this was a thing they showed us in the trailer and it isn't the first time they did that, they did that too with the Crossbow for AC 1

The trailer didn't indicate anyone except someone getting kicked off a cliff. Guess what happens to the protag in the game? For all we know, the kicker was the protag's father.

As for AC1 and the crossbow, they admitted it was a mistake because the crossbow wasn't invented in 1191.


we didn't got and finally the whole Justifications they use for the Choice mechanic that ignores the lore and logic of it's own franshise being that you can Choose the dialougue due to the DNA being too old to give us some of the info, instead of saying that Leyla just build an Animus that can show alternative realities, which means that they didn't really thought that out well, there are also issues with the Game being too much like Origins and the gameplay not really being a improvement over it's predessesor, but you know them already.

The DNA being too old was the justification for choosing a male or female protag, not because of the dialog choices.

And you can't even get her name right. It's Layla. Not Leyla.



Declaring them baseless demands is just cowardly and a weak way to descredit Criticism that is well grounded and justified, expecially then when the counter-arguments against said criticism is baseless, like denying Kassandra being mispresented, yet coincidently being the main hero of the story, it's like making a game about a Cowbow and a Native American and declaring that the NA is the canon hero, despite most promo material and trailers showing only the Cowbow.

Again. Say it with me. It. Is. Two. Different. Teams. Of. People. Separate. From. Each. Other. That. Are. Selling. Their. Protag.

Advertising are not the devs. Devs are not advertising. They are not related.

As for Kass being canon, it was said that Kass is "a" canon.


It might not bother you, but don't act like as if they aren't justified, because they actually are and shared amongst many people regarding this game. This is my last reply to you to this matter Animus since you couldn't even understand the criticism i made here, while acting like as if we are somehow wrong, kinda like how you falsely accuse Joel of using the word Autism here.

You are wrong because your criticisms are based on bits and pieces and you are going off of it like it is a complete puzzle. Time and Time again you speak lime you know the lore and you don't.

And I don't care what you say about Joel using "autism" he used it as an insult. There are better words that fit the definition more clearly than just being "autistic' about it. By you defending him, he is just as guilty.




And Synch: Please stop with this overly condensating tone here, Joel didn't do anything here. You don't have to defend the game each time someone criticisze it for valid reasons like it's terrible trailer. that's the problem i have with you. You defend the devs for nealry every overly-glaring mistake they made like the mismanaged Origins story that barely had anything to do with the Assassins Creed and thier tenets( except the don't kill innocent rule), who are just thrown there in such shallow ways, like the Hidden blade ( i mean, come on, can't they just reproduce the hidden blades from bayek, why cutting a ring finger like that?) it's almost unbelievable. It misinterpreted the Goals and ideals of the Assassins of fighting for the freedom of the people to simply being protector of the innocent, rather than to focus on freedom, after all, Bayek didn't object to the Gods ruling nor does Aya have problems with corrupt rulers like the Roman senate, so they seemingly care only about the Innocent people, no Nothing is true and everything is permitted. On top of you defendin the end product, you also defend Annulization on the grounds that it merely allows them to develop the games 4 years, while completely ignoring the fact, that Annulization makes over time the people less excited for the games they make if they come too often as well as them not being able to improve the games properly when rushing the release of the game this much. The work would become too much for single teams to handle and they would need to make diffrent teams with diffrent ideas that contradict the earlier lore like how Darby saying that they want to dial down the power of the PoE,which rougue convieniently ignored. It doesn't here matter that they work for 4 years in a game( considering Unity i kind of doubt that they work hard with their games anymore), because they are rushed to make so many games as possible to get game pro year out, making it impossible for them to think things through, unlike GoW that contrary to you took 5 years to make( source: the Dicrector) without rushing to yearly release by waiting for the game sell it's last copies and hearing the Criticism they get, that's Companies like Nitendo get most things correctly done, because they listen. So please stop being a apologist for every wrongdoing by the devs here, because you care more about Characters and the isu than the actually AC plot you admitted to be less interessted in than the First Civ, It's really getting ridicoulous here. I find it both funny, yet depressing synch that you have no points here other than making excuses everyone here already teared apar, it's the best to just let it rest, because you don't really understand what is discussed here. Ironic can't even descripe her here.

Don't know who "sync" is, but chances are they think you don't have a strong of a grasp on the lore like you think you do.

It's evident in your posts. As for this game, you've already codemned it before knowing what it's all about a d even when you do finally learn the details, you'll misconstrue that too.

And stop with the white knighting of a guy that used "autistic" as a terrible substitution for an insult unless you want to be associated with a guy like that.

AnimusLover
08-06-2018, 02:41 AM
They aren't "baseless" complaints, they are factual and correct statements and criticism towards the Game's adversement and it's development Philosophy. They declared a Character as the canon hero, despite not appearing in any of the main trailers and being not even in the cover at all, which makes the choice of choosing a Avatar 1)redundant and 2) pretty cowardly if they aren't able to show us a female heroine.

Oh, really? You're on this again? :rolleyes:


They also removed and changed elements of the game to like the shield with no real justification as to why? when this was a thing they showed us in the trailer and it isn't the first time they did that, they did that too with the Crossbow for AC 1 and the Story for Rayman Origins,

Don't care. :D


we didn't got and finally the whole Justifications they use for the Choice mechanic that ignores the lore and logic of it's own franshise being that you can Choose the dialougue due to the DNA being too old to give us some of the info,

OK, but I never approved of the choice mechanic. I'm just not as upset as some people because I gave up on the story having any kind of coherence since Origins and its success set a bad example for the devs along with Black Flag to essentially give us what we're getting now: an Assassin's Creed game that isn't Assassin's Creed. Fans enabled it, that’s why we’re here. Obviously, if people are satisfied with Black Flag and Origins not being proper AC games then fine but those same people cannot start complaining now about Odyssey. We’ve discussed this at length so not going round in circles with you again.

Like I've said before, I broke up with AC after Origins and now when I play it I equate it to casual sex with the ex and no strings attached. If you’re not happy, you can vote with your wallet and simply not buy the game rather than coming on here to whine everyday to devs who will not meet your demands. That, or accept what this franchise has become. Put up or shut up.


instead of saying that Leyla just build an Animus that can show alternative realities,

...which would have made even less sense. I suggest you watch LazerZ's video on the animus so that you can become reacquainted with how the animus is supposed to work. The animus is a DNA reader. That's it. It's simply a playback of memories. It's not a simulation so does not have the ability to fill in or create memories or realities.
Think of a DVD player - if the disk gets scratched to the point that it's corrupted the DVD won't fill in those scratched parts and play alternative takes of the movie, the disk simply won’t work. Likewise, a DVD cannot create alternate versions of a movie just like the animus cannot create alternative realities of a memory that actually happened.


not really being a improvement over it's predessesor, but you know them already.

Have you played it? No, you haven't.


Declaring them baseless demands is just cowardly and a weak way to descredit Criticism that is well grounded and justified, expecially then when the counter-arguments against said criticism is baseless,

Criticism without all the facts is baseless. Some people are getting upset over things that may not even come to pass. Yes, I understand why people are upset about the fact that there is a canon protagonist and a canon story that is essentially being allowed to be disregarded with the introduction of choice. However, some people seem to think Alexios isn't a canon character PERIOD. The creative developer never said this. He merely indicated that the story, as told in Odyssey, is supposed to be Kassandra’s journey. That doesn’t mean Alexios doesn't feature in the canon journey as a side character, just that he isn’t the protagonist. I can't go into more without getting into spoiler territory.


like denying Kassandra being mispresented, yet coincidently being the main hero of the story, it's like making a game about a Cowbow and a Native American and declaring that the NA is the canon hero, despite most promo material and trailers showing only the Cowbow. It might not bother you, but don't act like as if they aren't justified, because they actually are and shared amongst many people regarding this game.

I think you mean “underrepresented” and no, I did not deny that. For the umpteeth time: the devs said they are most proud of Kassandra but the MARKETING EXECUTIVES don't care about what the devs want. They will market the game according to what they feel will appeal to most consumers. You still don’t understand the difference between the creative aspect and the marketing/business aspect and that these two fields play very different roles with little crossover. I also never said it didn't bother me so stop putting words into my mouth.


This is my last reply to you to this matter Animus

I doubt it. Especially because you’ve already declared previously what your last post to me would be. :D


since you couldn't even understand the criticism i made here

I did despite the fact that your post was extremely difficult to read due to an omission of basic paragraphs and coherent sentencing coupled with some very problematic spelling and grammar, almost as if you were typing in such anger and haste that you forgot to care about presentation. All that nonsense you spout is not even delivered in a way that is easy on the eyes and yet I do you the kindness of trudging through it. I wish you did me the same, maybe then you'd read my posts better and stop misinterpreting and misunderstanding basic points.


, while acting like as if we are somehow wrong, kinda like how you falsely accuse Joel of using the word Autism here.

What the hell are you talking about? Joel did use the word ‘autistic' but it was in another thread. So either you didn't actually read his responses or you're silly enough to blatantly lie in front of everyone who can see - with their eyes - what he said. You sound crazy at this point.


And Synch: Please stop with this overly condensating tone here, Joel didn't do anything here. You don't have to defend the game each time someone criticisze it for valid reasons like it's terrible trailer. that's the problem i have with you. You defend the devs for nealry every overly-glaring mistake they made like the mismanaged Origins story that barely had anything to do with the Assassins Creed and thier tenets( except the don't kill innocent rule), who are just thrown there in such shallow ways, like the Hidden blade ( i mean, come on, can't they just reproduce the hidden blades from bayek, why cutting a ring finger like that?) it's almost unbelievable. It misinterpreted the Goals and ideals of the Assassins of fighting for the freedom of the people to simply being protector of the innocent, rather than to focus on freedom, after all, Bayek didn't object to the Gods ruling nor does Aya have problems with corrupt rulers like the Roman senate, so they seemingly care only about the Innocent people, no Nothing is true and everything is permitted.

Um, I can’t believe I’m doing this but I'm going to come to the defence of Origins a bit: it was literally the very beginning of the Brotherhood so of course it will look nothing like what it does in its current form. Bayek did not coin the term ‘Nothing is true, everything is permitted’. You're getting ahead of yourself historically and lore wise. Additionally, Bayek had grown up in awe of the Gods and Pharaohs his whole life so his view of them was not going to change overnight, come on. When he became a Hidden One he said some things during the two DLCs that indicated to me that the Gods' grip on his outlook had weakened and he was becoming more free thinking.

MnemonicSyntax
08-06-2018, 02:45 AM
*hands clap emoji*

AnimusLover
08-06-2018, 03:07 AM
How many times does it need to be repeated? The devs who "love Kass" are not the same people as the advertising department who are most likely told by higher update to use a specific protag.



Uh.. what? Shields weren't removed because they weren't in the game for the protags.



The trailer didn't indicate anyone except someone getting kicked off a cliff. Guess what happens to the protag in the game? For all we know, the kicker was the protag's father.

As for AC1 and the crossbow, they admitted it was a mistake because the crossbow wasn't invented in 1191.



The DNA being too old was the justification for choosing a male or female protag, not because of the dialog choices.

And you can't even get her name right. It's Layla. Not Leyla.




Again. Say it with me. It. Is. Two. Different. Teams. Of. People. Separate. From. Each. Other. That. Are. Selling. Their. Protag.

Advertising are not the devs. Devs are not advertising. They are not related.

As for Kass being canon, it was said that Kass is "a" canon.



You are wrong because your criticisms are based on bits and pieces and you are going off of it like it is a complete puzzle. Time and Time again you speak lime you know the lore and you don't.

And I don't care what you say about Joel using "autism" he used it as an insult. There are better words that fit the definition more clearly than just being "autistic' about it. By you defending him, he is just as guilty.





Don't know who "sync" is, but chances are they think you don't have a strong of a grasp on the lore like you think you do.

It's evident in your posts. As for this game, you've already codemned it before knowing what it's all about a d even when you do finally learn the details, you'll misconstrue that too.

And stop with the white knighting of a guy that used "autistic" as a terrible substitution for an insult unless you want to be associated with a guy like that.

Exactly, how can they "remove" shields when it was never in Odyssey in the first place? Aquarius is a prime example of a person making fully fledged, definitive criticisms on a first impressions alone without knowing context. From everything I've heard about the combat (which seems to border on magic at times according to YouTuber BlackHokage who played it) shields would definitely NOT work with some of the moves the protagonist will be pulling off, even if it is historically accurate. Now, there's an argument to be made about whether these moves should be in an Assassin's Creed game or not but that's a separate thing altogether. They sacrificed historical accuracy for gameplay mechanics here but as far as sacrifices go I think it's a very minor one. Whether it was worth it, we won't know until we play the game. What makes me laugh is that for all of Aquarius' complaining about shields, presumably due to historical accuracy, he/she wanted to see a crossbow in 1191 lol.
In regards to the marketing issue, sometimes I feel like Spike:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1b8hTeQj3GY

Olympus2018
08-08-2018, 10:03 PM
Odyssey needs two things to become the Perfect Game:

1) An ever enlarging map with frequent DLC!
2) To turn this game into a service, rather than a product, in order to last for many years to come, like GTA5, Hitman and the likes.

AnimusLover
08-08-2018, 11:03 PM
2) To turn this game into a service, rather than a product, in order to last for many years to come, like GTA5, Hitman and the likes.

Absolutely not, sorry. I don't mind it for MP but I want my SP games to be one and done.

MnemonicSyntax
08-09-2018, 12:08 AM
Absolutely not, sorry. I don't mind it for MP but I want my SP games to be one and done.

Agreed, GTAV doesn't even apply to this example, because GTAV is a single player game.

And Hitman didn't last "years" either. It lasted slightly longer than Origins did with it's content and about the same length if you count the Trials of the Gods.

Olympus2018
08-09-2018, 07:21 AM
Absolutely not, sorry. I don't mind it for MP but I want my SP games to be one and done.

Then you wouldn't like Witcher 3, GTA5 or Hitman because they are just like that... The same applies to AC Origins, albeit to a lesser extent.
I am 100% for games as a service model for huge open world RPG action games for a very simple reason: Once I finished Origins' quests, I felt like a fool. I had maximized XP level and though my character was extremely strong, he was useless because there was nothing more to do in the game. What's the point of building a character when by the end of this process, your character has nothing to do and no way to utilize his strength and abilities in combat, since there are no more quests or challenges for you to deal with. Why build a character in the first place? Just to beat your higher level enemies? Moreover, by the time you acquire the last ability, spending your final ability points, you have no enemies in quests to apply those abilities... So, you never really use some abilities. You tried so hard to get those abilities and the only abilities you have actually used extensively are those gained in the beginning of the game. On the contrary, the abilities you gained in the end or near the end of the game, were never used in a quest or maybe only once. That doesn't make sense to me. Why gain something that you will barely use?

Games as a service model (GaaS) comes to the rescue. Imagine maximizing your XP level and then wait for more DLC/side missions etc. in order to utilize all the abilities that you have gained throughout the game. Moreover, many people love the setting of any particular game. Some like Egypt in Origins, others prefer London, Paris, Rome, etc. etc. So, in my case, I love ancient Greece. I don't want this game to ever end so with GaaS, I could be playing this game for many years to come, not just a few months.

joelsantos24
08-09-2018, 11:46 AM
Then you wouldn't like Witcher 3, GTA5 or Hitman because they are just like that... The same applies to AC Origins, albeit to a lesser extent.
I am 100% for games as a service model for huge open world RPG action games for a very simple reason: Once I finished Origins' quests, I felt like a fool. I had maximized XP level and though my character was extremely strong, he was useless because there was nothing more to do in the game. What's the point of building a character when by the end of this process, your character has nothing to do and no way to utilize his strength and abilities in combat, since there are no more quests or challenges for you to deal with. Why build a character in the first place? Just to beat your higher level enemies? Moreover, by the time you acquire the last ability, spending your final ability points, you have no enemies in quests to apply those abilities... So, you never really use some abilities. You tried so hard to get those abilities and the only abilities you have actually used extensively are those gained in the beginning of the game. On the contrary, the abilities you gained in the end or near the end of the game, were never used in a quest or maybe only once. That doesn't make sense to me. Why gain something that you will barely use?

Games as a service model (GaaS) comes to the rescue. Imagine maximizing your XP level and then wait for more DLC/side missions etc. in order to utilize all the abilities that you have gained throughout the game. Moreover, many people love the setting of any particular game. Some like Egypt in Origins, others prefer London, Paris, Rome, etc. etc. So, in my case, I love ancient Greece. I don't want this game to ever end so with GaaS, I could be playing this game for many years to come, not just a few months.
Games as service is a cancer in the video-game industry, specifically designed to leach or milk the player-base for all they're worth. The original game is broken in parts, they sell you a "skeleton" as the base game and at the same exact price as before, so they can sell you the remaining parts as DLC, later. There's no interest on the player-base, community or the quality of the games, for that matter. The sole purpose is continuous revenue and maximisation of profit, over building a strong relation with the community and generating brand-loyalty. There's no relevance given to what the community likes or wants, but rather on how much they can pay.

The only reason why every single Ubisoft game is almost a "copy and paste" of one another, is for monetisation purposes. Every game is open world, with the same exact general features, hundreds of tasks, from conventional missions, secondary missions, ordinary exploration, to the endless gathering of resources and crafting, etc. Every game is the same barren wasteland, so that whosoever buys and plays AC, will likely buy and play GR, WD or other of their games. It's all the same. Great, compelling, linear, story-based and narrative-driven games aren't a priority for companies such as Ubisoft and EA, because they simply want the highest rate of revenue or return of investment. The overall quality of the experience, along with the players' wishes or desires don't really matter, just what they can get from them, in terms of money.

Ultimately, it also doesn't matter that the mantra "players don't want single-player, linear, story games" is a blatant lie, and Sony proves that with every single game they release. Additionally, it also doesn't matter that the most popular and best-selling games are all mostly linear, story-based. Because, at the end of the line, despite the level and standard of the games as service being much lower than ordinary narrative-oriented games, the recurrent and continuous income of the former is more than enough to quench the greed of these companies. As long as there're players willing and able to spend thousands of euros on micro-transactions, that is (https://www.pcgamesn.com/mass-effect-andromeda/bioware-multiplayer-microtransactions and http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/410557-fifa-player-uses-gdpr-and-finds-out-he-has-spent-over-10000-dollars-in-two-years-on-ultimate-team)...

Olympus2018
08-09-2018, 12:40 PM
Games as service is a cancer in the video-game industry, specifically designed to leach or milk the player-base for all they're worth. The original game is broken in parts, they sell you a "skeleton" as the base game and at the same exact price as before, so they can sell you the remaining parts as DLC, later. There's no interest on the player-base, community or the quality of the games, for that matter. The sole purpose is continuous revenue and maximisation of profit, over building a strong relation with the community and generating brand-loyalty. There's no relevance given to what the community likes or wants, but rather on how much they can pay.

The only reason why every single Ubisoft game is almost a "copy and paste" of one another, is for monetisation purposes. Every game is open world, with the same exact general features, hundreds of tasks, from conventional missions, secondary missions, ordinary exploration, to the endless gathering of resources and crafting, etc. Every game is the same barren wasteland, so that whosoever buys and plays AC, will likely buy and play GR, WD or other of their games. It's all the same. Great, compelling, linear, story-based and narrative-driven games aren't a priority for companies such as Ubisoft and EA, because they simply want the highest rate of revenue or return of investment. The overall quality of the experience, along with the players' wishes or desires don't really matter, just what they can get from them, in terms of money.

Ultimately, it also doesn't matter that the mantra "players don't want single-player, linear, story games" is a blatant lie, and Sony proves that with every single game they release. Additionally, it also doesn't matter that the most popular and best-selling games are all mostly linear, story-based. Because, at the end of the line, despite the level and standard of the games as service being much lower than ordinary narrative-oriented games, the recurrent and continuous income of the former is more than enough to quench the greed of these companies. As long as there're players willing and able to spend thousands of euros on micro-transactions, that is (https://www.pcgamesn.com/mass-effect-andromeda/bioware-multiplayer-microtransactions and http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/410557-fifa-player-uses-gdpr-and-finds-out-he-has-spent-over-10000-dollars-in-two-years-on-ultimate-team)...

I am not sure you are right. GTA5 is the most successful video game ever and it is a GaaS with over 100 million copies sold. The game was released 5 years ago and still played by millions of people. Ubisoft follows Rockstar's example, I think. Then, there is Witcher 3, one of the best RPG titles, ever. Again, DLCs were sold like crazy! If things were that bad, GTA5 would not be successful.

No one said that Odyssey will feature microtransactions. It could be just a season pass that will unlock all the extra DLCs for one year (season) for a reasonable price.

The example of the FIFA player who spent 10k is extremely rare. You have to be insane to spend 10k in micro-transactions. Most people won't spend more than 50 euros per year in micro transactions.

Short, linear games that cost 50 euros and you only play them for one month, finish the quests and then uninstall them is not the way to go. Especially if you like the setting...

The idea that players want short games is not right either. I know many people who are into simulation games like flight simulation and they play them for years to come. The same applies to MMORPGs like LoL which are played by millions of people for many years. AC Odyssey or Origins could also become GaaS and last for many years.

If the price is right, many people are willing to pay in order to play the same game for a very long time. Let me put it this way: If you are into ancient Egypt, Greece etc., you don't really want to play for 100 hours and then uninstall the game. In Origins, I got up to Level 45 and then I had nothing to do and uninstalled the game. I wouldn't want the same for Odyssey, no way.

AnimusLover
08-09-2018, 12:51 PM
Then you wouldn't like Witcher 3, GTA5 or Hitman because they are just like that... The same applies to AC Origins, albeit to a lesser extent.
I am 100% for games as a service model for huge open world RPG action games for a very simple reason: Once I finished Origins' quests, I felt like a fool. I had maximized XP level and though my character was extremely strong, he was useless because there was nothing more to do in the game. What's the point of building a character when by the end of this process, your character has nothing to do and no way to utilize his strength and abilities in combat, since there are no more quests or challenges for you to deal with. Why build a character in the first place? Just to beat your higher level enemies? Moreover, by the time you acquire the last ability, spending your final ability points, you have no enemies in quests to apply those abilities... So, you never really use some abilities. You tried so hard to get those abilities and the only abilities you have actually used extensively are those gained in the beginning of the game. On the contrary, the abilities you gained in the end or near the end of the game, were never used in a quest or maybe only once. That doesn't make sense to me. Why gain something that you will barely use?

Games as a service model (GaaS) comes to the rescue. Imagine maximizing your XP level and then wait for more DLC/side missions etc. in order to utilize all the abilities that you have gained throughout the game. Moreover, many people love the setting of any particular game. Some like Egypt in Origins, others prefer London, Paris, Rome, etc. etc. So, in my case, I love ancient Greece. I don't want this game to ever end so with GaaS, I could be playing this game for many years to come, not just a few months.

Witcher 3 (as in the main SP game, not the Gwent thing CDPR do on the side) does not use games as a service model; it has two full story DLCs that are complete in and of themselves with a definitive ending. I don't play GTA V online because I'm a SP person. The only MP I play is The Division.

Origins has New Game Plus which exists for the purpose of you playing with everything you acquired in your first playthrough...

The reason why I am against games as a service model is because a lot of developers and publishers use this as an excuse to sell a bare bones game at launch and then add in content that actually makes it PLAYABLE later on, rather than a full game a launch and then extend it with paid DLC. GTA V is the exception but look at Sea of Thieves and Destiny and how unhappy their players are.

Swailing
08-09-2018, 12:59 PM
...which would have made even less sense. I suggest you watch LazerZ's video on the animus so that you can become reacquainted with how the animus is supposed to work. The animus is a DNA reader. That's it. It's simply a playback of memories. It's not a simulation so does not have the ability to fill in or create memories or realities.
Think of a DVD player - if the disk gets scratched to the point that it's corrupted the DVD won't fill in those scratched parts and play alternative takes of the movie, the disk simply won’t work. Likewise, a DVD cannot create alternate versions of a movie just like the animus cannot create alternative realities of a memory that actually happened.

It's not, though. You are not simply watching a recording that was etched onto your ancestral DNA, and the Animus *is* a simulation built from that data. Anything can be filled in, and it is all the time because the animus pilot almost never does exactly what the ancestor did.

Synchronisation has always been a moving target, and the important thing was not to stray too far from the ancestral truth. But the games always acknowledged that Desmond et al's experience was distant from the ancestor's precise experience, and that not everything happened the way we saw it happen.

joelsantos24
08-09-2018, 01:17 PM
I am not sure you are right. GTA5 is the most successful video game ever and it is a GaaS with over 100 million copies sold. The game was released 5 years ago and still played by millions of people. Ubisoft follows Rockstar's example, I think. Then, there is Witcher 3, one of the best RPG titles, ever. Again, DLCs were sold like crazy! If things were that bad, GTA5 would not be successful.

No one said that Odyssey will feature microtransactions. It could be just a season pass that will unlock all the extra DLCs for one year (season) for a reasonable price.

The example of the FIFA player who spent 10k is extremely rare. You have to be insane to spend 10k in micro-transactions. Most people won't spend more than 50 euros per year in micro transactions.

Short, linear games that cost 50 euros and you only play them for one month, finish the quests and then uninstall them is not the way to go. Especially if you like the setting...

The idea that players want short games is not right either. I know many people who are into simulation games like flight simulation and they play them for years to come. The same applies to MMORPGs like LoL which are played by millions of people for many years. AC Odyssey or Origins could also become GaaS and last for many years.

If the price is right, many people are willing to pay in order to play the same game for a very long time. Let me put it this way: If you are into ancient Egypt, Greece etc., you don't really want to play for 100 hours and then uninstall the game. In Origins, I got up to Level 45 and then I had nothing to do and uninstalled the game. I wouldn't want the same for Odyssey, no way.
Who the **** plays a game and then uninstall it?

I only buy/play my favourite games, and I'm replaying them all the time. I've lost count on how many times I've replayed The Last of Us and the Uncharted series, for example. I've just restarted The Last of Us again. As soon as I finish, I'll restart playing The Order. I once finished that game twice, in one week. I also want to replay the Uncharted series, soon. I've already achieved platinum on God of War, but I'm desperate to replay it. Santa Monica has been drowning in requests for the "New Game+" feature, so that players can replay the game, without losing their progress. The examples go on and on and on... I know many people who do the same.

I think you're used to a very peculiar reality. Not many people have that much money to spend in games, and play whatever they get their hans on. People don't just forget and abandon great, linear, story-based games. That's just another lie being propagated by companies such as Ubisoft and EA, in order to legitimise and justify their business policies.

Olympus2018
08-09-2018, 01:22 PM
Who the **** plays a game and then uninstall it?

1) Those who have only consoles with limited storage like 500 GB
2) Most people that I know of... even with PCs
3) Those who pay 50 euros per month for a new open world game and they want to play different games all the time...

joelsantos24
08-09-2018, 02:03 PM
Most people don't have the money to spend on games so that they can play different titles all the time...

Like I said, it's a very peculiar context, the one you're describing. Being a Playstation fan, I know that our single-player, linear, story-based, narrative-oriented games aren't going anywhere. Moreover, their success is so overwhelming, that we're actually anxious for what's coming out in the future. Some people get their kicks with average games as service, as is their prerogative, but I rather play beautifully-looking (and finished) games with amazing stories.

Ironically, games like these are the ones that keep pulling us into replaying them, over and over again. That builds a trustworthy relation between the community and the studios/developers, evolving into a strong brand-loyalty that leads to more interest, and therefore, success for the following titles or sequels.

MnemonicSyntax
08-10-2018, 05:30 PM
Could we plet stop saying "GTA V" when it's clearly "GTAO" instead.

GTA V has had no updates to the SP game since forever, and it makes the conversation a completely moot point.

GOAT1081
10-09-2018, 06:52 PM
First off I want to make clear that I absolutely love this game. I've played every chapter of the AC series and I think Ubisoft has done a remarkable job with this game. The only series even in AC's league in my opinion is the Witcher saga. A few minor changes could definitely improve gameplay though. I would make items found using the Revelation ability more noticible in the daytime. I have a very hard time seeing "scanned loot" in the grass and woods especially during daytime. In my opinion a mini-map would be weird. You're kinda meant to not be able to see things through or behind walls/buildings. I really hope this story shows how mankind was created and I really hope spaceships and extraterrestrials/extradimensionals are somehow involved. lol