Support NeoGAF

[HotPocket69]

This entry seems about as divisive as Creed 3 between fans.

Funny that that’s the particular game they’re remastering for the Season Pass.

They should’ve touched up the original instead. THAT’S the structure/blueprint they need to return to.

 

[Dr. Claus]

It's not that I don't actually believe you've played the game it's just your terrible taste that makes no sense.

I think you're a bit, what's that word. Ignorant? Enjoying spending an hour fighting a bore with a combat system that consists of spamming R1 the entire time.



Did you just shift your argument to something else just as bullshit? Yep, you got me. I thought it was the sequal to Mario Kart.

Really mate? Petty insults?

Though I can't say I am surprised. It has been clear from your... contributions to this thread that you had no actual intention of genuine discourse. Have a good one, mate.

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Is it a fair assumption that if you liked Origins you'll like Odyssey?

 

[Dr. Claus]

Is it a fair assumption that if you liked Origins you'll like Odyssey?

I would say yes. Odyssey is just Origins except with new bells and whistles and a much more diverse world to explore (in terms of locations).

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

I would say yes. Odyssey is just Origins except with new bells and whistles and a much more diverse world to explore (in terms of locations).

Cool, thanks. I'll grab it when I finish with RDR2 for sure.

 

[Iaterain]

Angry Joe's AC Odyssey review summary:

The scores:
Angry Joe: 7/10;
Delrith: 6/10;
Alex: 7/10;

If you want an unbiased opinion about this game, I highly recommend to watch it.
It looks like 90% of positive comments in this topic were just lies. I wouldn't be surprised if some people were paid shills. It is the only explanation why would some people lie so much.

+
Another short comedy from videogamedunkey about AC Odyssey:

 

[Moneal]

Angry Joe's AC Odyssey review summary:

The scores:
Angry Joe: 7/10;
Delrith: 6/10;
Alex: 7/10;

If you want an unbiased opinion about this game, I highly recommend to watch it.
It looks like 90% of positive comments in this topic were just a lies. I wouldn't be surprised if some people in this topic are paid shills. It is the only explanation why would some people lie so much.

+
Another short comedy from videogamedunkey abou4t AC Odyssey:

People with different tastes than me are lying and paid to do so. Wow. just nice.

Joe and Co's biggest complaint was that they couldn't just rush through the story. They didn't seem to want to actually explore the world, even though they say the world is beautiful. I haven't played the game yet, but when Ubi pushed the whole open world RPG label, I knew that exploration and leveling were going to be a big part of the game.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

People with different tastes than me are lying and paid to do so. Wow. just nice.

Joe and Co's biggest complaint was that they couldn't just rush through the story. They didn't seem to want to actually explore the world, even though they say the world is beautiful. I haven't played the game yet, but when Ubi pushed the whole open world RPG label, I knew that exploration and leveling were going to be a big part of the game.

Just add him to your ignore list, nothing of value will be lost.

It's fine to disagree with people, but when they start calling anyone that disagrees with them a paid shill it's clear you're wasting your time.

 

[Sonny Black]

Sometimes I actually wonder if these players are not just bot..
In any case It seem they can't put things in perspective, "boubouhh I'm crying because the game is an RPG" what the fuck? I don't really like what they did with the series..do you see me being unreasonable and biased ?

 

[JORMBO]

I didn’t like the game at first, but am liking it a lot now that I have gotten further. The story has been interesting and I like exploring the world more. Combat gets more interesting as you unlock new abilities. Ship combat still sucks.

 

[Thiagosc777]

Angry Joe's AC Odyssey review summary:

The scores:
Angry Joe: 7/10;
Delrith: 6/10;
Alex: 7/10;

If you want an unbiased opinion about this game, I highly recommend to watch it.
It looks like 90% of positive comments in this topic were just lies. I wouldn't be surprised if some people were paid shills. It is the only explanation why would some people lie so much.

+
Another short comedy from videogamedunkey about AC Odyssey:

Good review. Although I would have given a much lower score.

Funny that they mentioned the exact same thing I mentioned here, the resource constraints. But some people here told me nobody cared about customizing their characters...

The way the mainstream media is outright campaigning for this game is absurd. I wouldn't be too surprised if they hired some company to do viral marketing, like posing as a gamer saying nice things about it and attacking those who disagree.

 

[Nydus]

Hmpf. I loved origins but I'm not getting warm with Odyssey. The combat feels weightless, the animations are worse, less weapon styles, Range combat is absolutely gutted compared to origins and most of the skills are useless. They even destroyed fighting on horseback. And having no shield as a Greek soldier was a shit decision. I just feel dumb running at an archer without the ability to raise my shield. Maybe they wanted to imitate Bloodborne? I would look so awesome with a nice shield -_-#

Atleast the story and dialog are nice. But I miss Bayek he felt so much better to play...

 

[Xaero Gravity]

I have to admit something to you guys, I'm actually a viral marketing for Ubisoft. I don't actually enjoy the game, but was paid to say that I do in hopes of getting others to buy it, despite the fact that I'm pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things when it comes to an online presence.


The fact that anyone would actually genuinely enjoy the game is absolutely absurd, and you should feel stupid for even thinking so. Shame on you, suckers.

 

[Philtastic]

How can you know that it took you for about 6-7 minutes? If you were using a stopwatch or were recording the video, you would know the precise time. Nobody will take you serious if you were using an "inner" clock . So your 6-7 minutes is just a straight up lie.
My statement, that it takes 8-12 minutes to kill the boar is based on twitch and youtube videos where people killed it for 8-12 minutes.

It is also very unfair to compare this game to Witcher III. People love CD Project Red's game, because it is one time purchase for full experience. The Witcher III is used as an exemplary game to shame game developers who are cutting content using microtransactions/lootboxes/seasonspasse/fake currency. The Witcher III is always used as example that the developers don't need to use all these shady business practices in order their game to be profitable.

It is so weird that you guys, from all games in the world, are trying to compare this bizarre free2play mobile like game to Witcher III. It is like comparing a nun with a whore.

It took me just under 4 minutes on my first try at level 15 as assassin spec with all of my gear stacked for assassin damage.

If you're going to do this quest with melee, you just need to be prepared to dodge a lot and not over commit yourself. Given that these are supposed to legendary creatures, I felt that this fight and the hind after it were appropriately epic. After doing two of these legendary animal quests, it seems that they have anti-melee abilities, such as this boar pushing you back with a roar and the hind that pushes you back almost every time it turns to face you. Combined with the fact that animals have the ability to shrug off your melee attacks and you get bow/quiver upgrades from the quests, I'm fairly certain that the optimal way to kill these animals is by being hunter spec'ed.

In other news, I'm 28 hours into the game at level 26 and really enjoying it! If you mostly just ignore the randomly generated quests and just do the "main" side quests (the ones with golden exclamation marks on the map) that have unique dialogue and twists on the typical activities in the game, you'll have a pretty good time. I should note that you don't get to see the golden exclamation marks until you've explored the relevant regions of the world, thus you need to go out and see the world to find the best quests that the game has to offer.

 

[The Bloody-Nine]

Just add him to your ignore list, nothing of value will be lost.

It's fine to disagree with people, but when they start calling anyone that disagrees with them a paid shill it's clear you're wasting your time.

Solid advice.

 

[Sygma]

People were defending microtransactions in multiplayer games because they were optional and didn't affect the gameplay. It was mostly cosmetics.
In AC Odyssey the microtransactions are increasing your XP gains, giving you more efficient gear or more resources for upgrades.

It is very different experience to play the game with or without microtransactions. For example in the side-quest "Daughters of Artemis" people were killing a boar for 8-12 minutes, if you pay for microtransactions you would kill it for 4-5 minutes and would probably enjoy the game more.

Source / proof. Animals are meant to be fought via hunting builds mainly because of the overabundance of crit damage + dmg to beasts you can get only with bows

Its entirely possible to one shot any +10 to +25 enemy in the game from lvl 35 - 36, bosses included

Because fighting one boar for 8-12 minutes is a boring and exhausting activity. Lets compare it with Dark Souls III bosses. It takes for about 3-7 minutes to kill Twin Princes lorian and lothric. Because Dark Souls III is a Skill>Gear>Level based game. Odyssey is Level>Gear>Microtransactions based game. It is obvious that Ubisoft artificially created problems in order to sell "fixes".

You're full of shit. In Souls and Bloodborne Level > Gear > player skill. It will take more than 7 mins to kill the cleric beast on your first attempt aswell

By paying for microtransactions you aren't skipping the gameplay or side-quests you are just doing quests more efficient and playing the game as is was meant to be played.

Actually if you pay for microtransactions in odyssey you're kinda retarded. I can get about 2000 wood, which is deemed as the hardest / most cumbersome ressource to get, in about 15 mins

its close to impossible to run out of money, and you get everything else by dismantling gear. The 20€ ressource packs they're selling are honestly a one - two hour time save AT BEST

You will not kill anything quicker because you buy these things, since you'll always deal more dps by simply leveling up and using the correct engraving on your gear

You cannot get the best engravings via mtx or whatever so your point is actually a waste of time

There isn't much arguments to defend microtransactions in full price single player games, so the defenders of this practices just calling people stupid or ignorant as a "valid" counter-argument.

Surely there is more to defend in sports games, gta online, and the biggest offender being Forza Horizon since how long now ?

tell me whats the difference between your single player and multiplayer game

in both cases the psychological impact is the same


If odyssey had mtx at disposal via a store only reachable through uplay / psn / xbox live and if said mtx weren't showed AT ALL in the game you people wouldn't have been as falsely outraged as you pretend you are. At best it would have been "there are mtx in the shop section"


Also lol at angry joe

a guy who could barely play Evolve at the skill cap required, literally blaming GAME DESIGN for his buddy fucking up a dome right in the review. Guy is a pure waste of time


edit :

Like, so grindy.

lmao

I'm a shill paid to speedrun plz ban

 

[Thiagosc777]

I can get about 2000 wood, which is deemed as the hardest / most cumbersome ressource to get, in about 15 mins

But I was told that grinding wasn't necessary... what happened? Now it is necesssary, but you can do it quick? How long before you admit you need to spend hours doing boring side missions to level up?

 

[UnwrittenZero]

Got the plat last night at midnight. I had a lot of fun with the game.

 

[Philtastic]

But I was told that grinding wasn't necessary... what happened? Now it is necesssary, but you can do it quick? How long before you admit you need to spend hours doing boring side missions to level up?

When people defending this game (and even other games) say that there is "no grind", they aren't saying that there is literally no point in time where you will need to collect things or do side quests (as if that's a bad thing... unless you're just doing those randomly generated filler quests from the message board). They usually mean that it doesn't feel boring and repetitive, which is the difference between great games and mediocre ones that, in terms of game play mechanics, don't often radically change over the course of the game. In my 28 hours with Odyssey at level 26, I have never felt that I had to do repetitive tasks to level up or collect enough resources. Now, as a completionist, I have been mostly outleveling the main quest line because I usually stop to do all of the "main" side quests that have unique dialogue, characters, plots, and often some small consequences. I've found most of these "main" side quests amusing at worst and quite engrossing at best where they span multiple quests to tell a much bigger tale. These are marked with a gold exclamation mark on the map. One critique that I'd level at this game is that you only see these exclamation marks if you've gone to the relevant regions, which means that a player needs to, of their own volition without any in-game guidance, decide to simply explore the world.

As an example of the bigger side quests, I did the "Death and Taxes" and "Freedom isn't Free" quests on the island of Euboea last night which have continued into the "Kingfisher and the Robin" side quest on the island of Skyros (which I hope to do tonight) where I've been helping the local magistrate uncover an organized crime syndicate called The Dagger. This quest line involved (vague to avoid spoilers) finding some tax records associated with the gang, a bit of drama in the theatre, discovering a lost relic which the gang might have wanted to use in some rituals, and rescuing a farmer for information on the gang leader's identity (this part of the quest may have been altered in my game since I had rescued the farmer prior to having the relevant quest: a bunch of thugs jumped me when I went back to talk to the farmer since he had spilled some info to me earlier). And now this totally optional, multi-part side quest with lots of unique dialogue is taking me to a new island. I would not have seen this side quest if I had just tried to follow the main quest, but Euboea was on the way, so I stopped and took a look. Now, most of the side quests that I've done so far haven't been this large in scope, but they've mostly all had unique characters and mini-stories that make the typical fetch and/or kill game play more interesting than if I was just trying to clear every fort or repeatedly murdering every mercenary over and over to level up. It's these "main" side quests that make the game, for me, feel a lot like The Witcher 3 where every side quest felt like its own mini story.

So, in summary, I'd say that yes, you have to do some side quests to get through the game, but I'd highly disagree that they're boring. Go out and explore the world and stick to the gold exclamation point missions rather than doing those actually grindy message board, randomly generated ones that have throwaway plots and generic characters.

 

[SirKicksalot]

I finished Origins and its expansions and I have no idea what the game is about. I liked the part with the city in the desert though.
Odyssey is the first AC story I enjoy since AC2 (haven't played Syndicate). Even the stupid first civilization elements are neat.

 

[sertopico]

Angry Joe's AC Odyssey review summary:

The scores:
Angry Joe: 7/10;
Delrith: 6/10;
Alex: 7/10;

If you want an unbiased opinion about this game, I highly recommend to watch it.
It looks like 90% of positive comments in this topic were just lies. I wouldn't be surprised if some people were paid shills. It is the only explanation why would some people lie so much.

+
Another short comedy from videogamedunkey about AC Odyssey:

Yes, we are all liars and influencers on Ubisoft's payroll. My god, when this endless series of obnoxious comments will end? Can't you people just accept divergence of opinions? You think you belong to the 0,1% of that enlightened minority who finally was able to pierce the veil of hypocrity and untruth?

What did this forum become? Really?

 

[hollowcupra]

While i love watching Angry Joe's videos i only do it because they are funny but i never take into account his gameplay opinions because he's always struggling with games that have more than one mechanic, so i can't really take hime seriously with this one.

 

[hollowcupra]

Yes, we are all liars and influencers on Ubisoft's payroll. My god, when this endless series of obnoxious comments will end? Can't you people just accept divergence of opinions? You think you belong to the 0,1% of that enlightened minority who finally was able to pierce the veil of hypocrity and untruth?

What did this forum become? Really?

It's not about this forum. It's something i always encounter in gaming communities. While i understand that different people have different tastes i can't take seriously people that use the word garbage without proper explanation or without having actually played the game and to them people that like something are always getting payed by the companies.

I never like Assassins Creed games except Black Flag and Odyssey but i don't have actually something bad to say about them. They just weren't for me.

 

[sertopico]

It's not about this forum. It's something i always encounter in gaming communities. While i understand that different people have different tastes i can't take seriously people that use the word garbage without proper explanation or without having actually played the game and to them people that like something are always getting payed by the companies.

I never like Assassins Creed games except Black Flag and Odyssey but i don't have actually something bad to say about them. They just weren't for me.

Exactly, and I respect that. At the same time I would never take into consideration to offend somebody or simply to ruin an entire thread because others don't think the same way I do. In the end they succeeded, I don't remember when the game itself has been discussed the last time. This kind of approach into a discussion is pure cancer.

 

[Darak]

I'm on my second playthrough (just to get the good ending; to give the game credit, this is the first AC I've ever played a second time, and that's just after finishing it). I'm enjoying it a lot more this time. An early optional sidequest I skipped last time gives you an item that doubles your base damage but restricts your health at 25%, making you into a glass cannon. This makes assassin builds a lot more enjoyable in nightmare mode (I'm finally being able to clear a fort without entering battle mode), not to mention making the spear launch skill completely OP.

I've been watching AJ's review and reading many others and I wonder if there is a point when reviewers just stop enjoying games and start playing them just as a job. Perhaps that's the reason they rush through a game's content, follow the quest markers, ignore the side content, etc. I guess they have a lot of games to review and a deadline, but it's the complete opposite of players who just want games to last long, specially when they are enjoying them.

 

[Kreydo]

I never like Assassins Creed games except Black Flag and Odyssey but i don't have actually something bad to say about them. They just weren't for me.

Exactly, and I respect that. At the same time I would never take into consideration to offend somebody or simply to ruin an entire thread because others don't think the same way I do. In the end they succeeded, I don't remember when the game itself has been discussed the last time. This kind of approach into a discussion is pure cancer.

It depend... I'm a bit like H hollowcupra , except that I really tried to enjoy Assassin Creed, I played 1 and 2 for several hours but could never go further than 3 or 4 hours.
Simply because the game have a low standard on almost every aspect beside maybe animation and graphics? It's a very immature way of thinking to pretend everything is about liking or disliking with a total subjective point of view.
Games are not likes movies and art, they have features, and game mechanics who can be judged and put in comparison.
While of course people can like Assassin Creed for what it is, but it doesn't make the game being good or flawless by any mean.

I listed a nice amount of flaw in some of my previous post, and majority of them were adressed by "It's Assassin Creed lol what do you expect?"... This doesn't make any sense.

What I'm seeing the most on forums (beside the fanboys/haters meaningless fight), it's that people are in a very large majority clueless about games features, and will use their taste to justify their ignorance and confort their opinion.

 

[Sonny Black]

What was the flaws you pointed out, exactly?

 

[base]

Finished the game last night. The ending is a joke.

 

[wvnative]

What. The. Fuck?

Been defending the microtransactions aspect even if I think the game itself is a time waster and no where near as good as Origins cause it felt too me, like the witcher, they just wanted the player to have a long memorable journey in a world they spent 3 long hard years making. It didn't seem like ill intent to get you to pay, just weird design.

Then I completed the United Front quest. A level 25 quest.

Spoiler: Gameplay spoilers some people might want tagged

The next quest is goddamn level 31. So far it seems to generally take me about an hour to level up. Kassandra is level 25. I estimate 6-7 hours of non-stop side questing just to proceed the main plot

My motivation to play has tanked.

 

[TheWatcher]

What. The. Fuck?

Been defending the microtransactions aspect even if I think the game itself is a time waster and no where near as good as Origins cause it felt too me, like the witcher, they just wanted the player to have a long memorable journey in a world they spent 3 long hard years making. It didn't seem like ill intent to get you to pay, just weird design.

Then I completed the United Front quest. A level 25 quest.

Spoiler: Gameplay spoilers some people might want tagged

The next quest is goddamn level 31. So far it seems to generally take me about an hour to level up. Kassandra is level 25. I estimate 6-7 hours of non-stop side questing just to proceed the main plot

My motivation to play has tanked.

It really takes away from the combat when you are hacking and slashing enemies for 3 - 5 minutes at a time to kill them.

 

[Thiagosc777]

What. The. Fuck?

Been defending the microtransactions aspect even if I think the game itself is a time waster and no where near as good as Origins cause it felt too me, like the witcher, they just wanted the player to have a long memorable journey in a world they spent 3 long hard years making. It didn't seem like ill intent to get you to pay, just weird design.

Then I completed the United Front quest. A level 25 quest.

Spoiler: Gameplay spoilers some people might want tagged

The next quest is goddamn level 31. So far it seems to generally take me about an hour to level up. Kassandra is level 25. I estimate 6-7 hours of non-stop side questing just to proceed the main plot

My motivation to play has tanked.

Hahahahaha. But obviously you are doing something wrong! People here told me that this game didn't require any grinding! You are the problem! You are just a hater! /sarcasm

This game single handedly made me reconsider purchasing digital games. Had I bought it physical I could have sold it away and got some of my money back. With digital I am stuck with it and I can't ask for a refund anymore.

 

[wvnative]

Hahahahaha. But obviously you are doing something wrong! People here told me that this game didn't require any grinding! You are the problem! You are just a hater! /sarcasm

This game single handedly made me reconsider purchasing digital games. Had I bought it physical I could have sold it away and got some of my money back. With digital I am stuck with it and I can't ask for a refund anymore.

I still do mostly digital cause my buddy and i game share. If not for game sharing though... yeah.

Luckily my friend payed for Odyssey lol

 

[Zewp]

Man, why are you guys still engaging with the trolls. They're clearly here to disrupt normal discussion of the game, so just ignore them so they can't do that.

 

[SirKicksalot]

Then I completed the United Front quest. A level 25 quest.

Spoiler: Gameplay spoilers some people might want tagged

The next quest is goddamn level 31. So far it seems to generally take me about an hour to level up. Kassandra is level 25. I estimate 6-7 hours of non-stop side questing just to proceed the main plot

My motivation to play has tanked.

It's because people ignored the Homestead in AC3, which had some of the best content in the game.
Why do you want to exclusively play the main quest? Especially now when side content has proper story arcs with branching paths that last multiple hours across multiple regions.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

Exactly, and I respect that. At the same time I would never take into consideration to offend somebody or simply to ruin an entire thread because others don't think the same way I do. In the end they succeeded, I don't remember when the game itself has been discussed the last time. This kind of approach into a discussion is pure cancer.

I honestly don't know why they haven't been banned from the thread. They're not even here to debate, they're here to shit on and disrespectfully insult the integrity of anyone that happens to disagree with them. If your go to method of discussion is to be a complete asshole, why bother engaging at all?

 

[hollowcupra]

It depend... I'm a bit like H hollowcupra , except that I really tried to enjoy Assassin Creed, I played 1 and 2 for several hours but could never go further than 3 or 4 hours.
Simply because the game have a low standard on almost every aspect beside maybe animation and graphics? It's a very immature way of thinking to pretend everything is about liking or disliking with a total subjective point of view.
Games are not likes movies and art, they have features, and game mechanics who can be judged and put in comparison.
While of course people can like Assassin Creed for what it is, but it doesn't make the game being good or flawless by any mean.

I listed a nice amount of flaw in some of my previous post, and majority of them were adressed by "It's Assassin Creed lol what do you expect?"... This doesn't make any sense.

What I'm seeing the most on forums (beside the fanboys/haters meaningless fight), it's that people are in a very large majority clueless about games features, and will use their taste to justify their ignorance and confort their opinion.

It's not about like or disliking. It's the arguments and valid points we make when we post our opinions on something, especially on public forums where discussions must stay afloat. When someone says the word garbage i expect the user to have at least spend a certain amount of time to see the game and give valid points on why he thinks that. But the user must understand that people with different opinion might answer and prove the user wrong. If we all follow that trend then everyone will boot a game, see the first 5 minutes and start calling out stuff because he just has a certain grudge against something or because he likes something a lot. Let the reviewers play a game for 1 or 2 chapters and then write reviews. How will that turn out.

When i said that i disliked most games in the AC series but have not anything bad to say it's that i don't really have arguements to make, saying that i don't like the linearity of the story, or the extreme amount of bugs won't take the discussion anywhere because that's what most AC games are, at least with Odyssey they are trying to change the formula and i think they are doing a really good job.

Yes the game is grindy for AC standards but for RPG standards it's not, and unfortunately for the funs of the old games, Odyssey is an RPG, not the best out there, but it's an RPG.

 

[Kreydo]

I honestly don't know why they haven't been banned from the thread. They're not even here to debate, they're here to shit on and disrespectfully insult the integrity of anyone that happens to disagree with them. If your go to method of discussion is to be a complete asshole, why bother engaging at all?

Banned for critisim the game in a "REVIEW" thread? And you are talking about willing to debate? Stop being offended like a snowflake everytime someone say someting negative about the game, and maybe MAYBE, you won't feel so "disrespected in your inner self"... Btw your post actually doesn't ADD anything to the debate, except salt.

Yes the game is grindy for AC standards but for RPG standards it's not, and unfortunately for the funs of the old games, Odyssey is an RPG, not the best out there, but it's an RPG.

Yup, and in my opinion Assassin Creed shouldn't be a RPG, they should have stayed adventure/story driven games. Instead Ubisoft should have created a new licences to explore RPG feature/elements properly.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

Banned for critisim the game in a "REVIEW" thread? And you are talking about willing to debate? Stop being offended like a snowflakes everytime someone say someting negative about the game, and maybe MAYBE, you won't feel so "disrespected in your inner self"... Btw your post actually doesn't ADD anything to the debate, except salt.

Yup, and in my opinion Assassin Creed shouldn't be a RPG, they should have stayed adventure/story driven games. Instead Ubisoft should have created a new licences to explore RPG feature/elements properly.

I think you're misunderstanding me. I've said several times in various OTs and review threads that criticism should be presented. I absolutely hate echo chambers and hive minds. What I don't want is the shit they're pulling. Where anybody that disagrees with them gets belittled and talked down to for having a differing opinion. It's quite frankly toxic and adds nothing to the discussion, but sure I'm just a fucking snowflake.

 

[Philtastic]

What. The. Fuck?

Been defending the microtransactions aspect even if I think the game itself is a time waster and no where near as good as Origins cause it felt too me, like the witcher, they just wanted the player to have a long memorable journey in a world they spent 3 long hard years making. It didn't seem like ill intent to get you to pay, just weird design.

Then I completed the United Front quest. A level 25 quest.

Spoiler: Gameplay spoilers some people might want tagged

The next quest is goddamn level 31. So far it seems to generally take me about an hour to level up. Kassandra is level 25. I estimate 6-7 hours of non-stop side questing just to proceed the main plot

My motivation to play has tanked.

Hahahahaha. But obviously you are doing something wrong! People here told me that this game didn't require any grinding! You are the problem! You are just a hater! /sarcasm

This game single handedly made me reconsider purchasing digital games. Had I bought it physical I could have sold it away and got some of my money back. With digital I am stuck with it and I can't ask for a refund anymore.

So, I acknowledge that there are people who just want to go through the main story, and those people will definitely hit this level jump and and be forced to engage in the side content. As I said earlier, I recommend finding the gold exclamation mark quests in unexplored regions of the map since they're much more entertaining than just doing randomly generated message board quests or clearing forts for no reason. For example, I did end up finishing that Euboea side quest that I described earlier which took me from level 26 to 28, particularly because this side quest was actually more like 5 quests chained together along with a handful of forts/camps/caves to form one nice short story.

For some perspective on how other people are playing this game, I'm level 28 now at 33 hours played and I'm just about to start Athens and meet Perikles. I will probably be overleveled by the time I get to that level jump part of the main story. I'm doing a lot of exploration around the map, doing all of the gold exclamation marks, passively completing the legendary xp reward quests from the message boards (the "kill # of x soldiers" or "loot # of nation chests" ones that you just complete automatically as you play but grant like half a level of xp), doing conquests if they happen to pop up since I kill things quickly and also grant large amounts of xp and decent loot, and doing many but not all of the various forts and camps along the way because I both enjoy doing them and, since I'm assassin spec'ed, I can rip through them pretty fast as I one-shot everything without attracting any mercenaries who, even if they do show up, die in two/three shots at night to a Critical Assassination + Hero Strike, throw in poison if they have a sliver of health left or use an Overpower Attack to finish a bigger hp chunk. To me, it's not feeling grindy because I've got a lot of variety mixing "main" side quest stories together with random forts along the way if I feel like them and conquests for when I feel like open battle to contrast my stealthy game play.

Overall, what's grindy to one person might not be to someone else, which is probably why there are such varied opinions on how "grindy" this game is.

 

[Zewp]

Banned for critisim the game in a "REVIEW" thread? And you are talking about willing to debate? Stop being offended like a snowflake everytime someone say someting negative about the game, and maybe MAYBE, you won't feel so "disrespected in your inner self"... Btw your post actually doesn't ADD anything to the debate, except salt.

They're not just criticising the game, though. The problem is that they're criticising and insulting everyone who doesn't agree with them. I've been playing the game for almost two weeks now and I really enjoy it. To me it doesn't feel grindy and I've never felt the need to buy microtransactions. And yet, I've had to hear that I'm either straight up lying (because apparently I'd lie when I'm not having fun with something I spent 60 euro on) or that I'm a shill. Because apparently when a select few users don't like the game, nobody is allowed to like the game and they need to be insulted if they do.

It's just straight up trolling at this point and they're intentionally disrupting conversation to shove their opinions down everyone else's throats. There's no winners in shouting matches.

 

[Muffdraul]

Is it a fair assumption that if you liked Origins you'll like Odyssey?

For the most part, yes I think. There is one thing, though-

People complained that in Origins, they nerfed the hidden blade to the point where you couldn't assassinate enemies any more. That was true, BUT ONLY UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES- i.e. only when you were using it against enemies that were a way higher level than you. Thing is, if you followed the "narrative path" around the map and didn't wander into areas you weren't meant to go yet, the enemies would always be around your level, close enough that you could always one-shot them. Only exceptions being the phylakes, extremely rare super-tough brutes that you had to fight.

Well, that's not the case with Odyssey. Now you have to A) level up your "assassin damage" and B) have at least one adrenaline gauge segment charged up to use an assassination skill. So you can often find yourself in situations where you've successfully taken the "risk" to stealthily sneak up on a guy to get him within assassination range, but you don't get the "reward" because you have no adrenaline charged. The only way to charge it open combat. That sucks. If you sneak up behind a fort's captain and he's just standing there staring into space thinking about the last time he was with his wife, you should be able to assassinate him, period.

 

[Grayecastle]

Perhaps it is message board sin to post on a thread without reading the entire thread first, but I am a sinner. I shall probably sin again.

My immediate suspicion when I look at how well received was that the big name reviewing sites/mags were receiving some dough from Ubisoft to ensure that they could profit off of at least a couple more Assassin's Creed games. Admittedly, I have not put my hands on origins a single time mostly because of that line of thought. Now I am having to reconsider that opinion since this game is doing even more well than the last.

For those of you who have played a significant amount of Odyssey, are the reviews embellished to hell or has Ubisoft successfully breathed life back into the series?

 

[Thiagosc777]

For those of you who have played a significant amount of Odyssey, are the reviews embellished to hell or has Ubisoft successfully breathed life back into the series?

Watch Angry Joe's review. It's pretty good and well balanced.

 

[DS_Joost]

Watch Angry Joe's review. It's pretty good and well balanced.

I put Karak waaaaaay above angry joe's though. You just like it because it agrees with you.

 

[Bill O'Rights]

Evening folks,


In a review thread it's likely there will be various scores along the spectrum, and over time it's fully expected these scores will mature and be more representative of spending longer with the game. Ubisoft have gone on record as saying they are intending to make the 'Assassin's Creed' franchise more RPG-like if not full on. It's fair to assume this will draw criticism from those who want the established action formula and those who like the new direction.


For general discussion about the game and mechanics the |OT| is probably a better place, however the review thread will undoubtedly create factions where both sides can point to mainstream/independent reviewers that support their own experiences. However, I ask that you bear in mind your own biases (negative and positive) and don't make this into a 'x' validates my opinion which proves I'm right. It would be more productive to concentrate on why there is such a polarised reception to the game. If Ubisoft do intend to continue down this path, is this indicative of the traditional fans not liking it, are they being given a free pass whereas Bioware were crucified for the 'power' mechanic in Inquisition?


All in all - from this point - on direct personal insults (of which some have come markedly close) will earn thread bans. Having said that by participating in a review thread, it is expected both sides can digest the others arguments and with that in mind, stomach opinions which may run contrary to their experiences.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

Perhaps it is message board sin to post on a thread without reading the entire thread first, but I am a sinner. I shall probably sin again.

My immediate suspicion when I look at how well received was that the big name reviewing sites/mags were receiving some dough from Ubisoft to ensure that they could profit off of at least a couple more Assassin's Creed games. Admittedly, I have not put my hands on origins a single time mostly because of that line of thought. Now I am having to reconsider that opinion since this game is doing even more well than the last.

For those of you who have played a significant amount of Odyssey, are the reviews embellished to hell or has Ubisoft successfully breathed life back into the series?

I've played every mainline AC, and this one is my favorite so far simply because of how much it's differed from the formula due to it being an action RPG.

The story is also the first one to really hook me since AC2 and Brotherhood. Even the side missions are interesting to me, at least the ones with gold exclamation marks on them.

A few people here seem to hate the game with a passion, mainly due to them apparently having to grind, but I'm playing on hard and haven't had to grind once. I don't know if it's because I'm actively enjoying the side quests and thus doing them, but I figured it's worth mentioning.

Overall I'd say if you're expecting something along the lines of an AC game before Origins, you'll be disappointed. But otherwise I say it's definitely worth checking out if you like action RPGs.


If I had to rank the maijln console AC games, it'd go as such:

AC Odyssey
AC IV
AC II/Brotherhood
AC Rouge
AC Origins
AC I
AC III
AC Unity
AC Syndicate
AC Revelations

 

[base]

Haha. Odyssey first? Quit dreaming.

 

[Philtastic]

Perhaps it is message board sin to post on a thread without reading the entire thread first, but I am a sinner. I shall probably sin again.

My immediate suspicion when I look at how well received was that the big name reviewing sites/mags were receiving some dough from Ubisoft to ensure that they could profit off of at least a couple more Assassin's Creed games. Admittedly, I have not put my hands on origins a single time mostly because of that line of thought. Now I am having to reconsider that opinion since this game is doing even more well than the last.

For those of you who have played a significant amount of Odyssey, are the reviews embellished to hell or has Ubisoft successfully breathed life back into the series?

I'm not much of an AC fan. I liked 1 and the 2 trilogy but was bored with 3 and 4 and then I stopped playing the series entirely because it all seemed like the same tired formula. The thing that I didn't like the most about the AC series was that, if you were eventually seen, the open combat really, really sucked, mostly consisting of waiting for an enemy to attack and then countering. Origins really peaked my interest with its completely revamped, action RPG game play, and I really enjoyed it! It also helped that Bayek and Aya were interesting characters to me, and I enjoyed the more personal-feeling themes of parenthood and family.

With Odyssey, I'm 33 hours in at level 28 out of 50, and I'm absolutely loving this game! According to the Uplay stats, I am only 26% done the main story, and this is because there is just so much content. Now, much of that content could be considered filler depending on how much you enjoy doing them: random forts; randomly generated kill & fetch quests with throwaway characters and plots that you get from a message board; the faction region control and conquest battles where you fight alongside an army; and the puzzles where you have a clue to guide you to a treasure location. There are, however, plenty of, in my opinion, good-to-excellent "main" side quests spread out across the lands. I would argue that these are often close to the same quality level as The Witcher 3's side quests with a lot of attention to detail (being able to do steps out of sequence or doing something unconventional while having these acknowledged with different outcomes; multi-quest storylines that span multiple regions with unique characters, dialogue, and consequences), but it's hard for me to directly compare them since W3 was generally much more serious in tone while Odyssey is, I feel, more varied with a lot of lighthearted but also really dark moments. I really, really liked The Witcher 3 (180 hours played, bought the collector's edition which wasn't even available in my country of Canada. I should also disclose that I bought the Spartan Edition of Odyssey since it seemed to mimic a lot of what I liked about W3), and this is an informed but premature opinion, but I am actually debating with myself over whether I like Odyssey more than The Witcher 3. I believe that the main and side stories of W3 were better written but the game play of Odyssey is much better with far less inventory management and more responsive and varied combat (I really liked W3's combat, but it's hard to beat the assassination/bow/Spartan-kicking trifecta of Odyssey). If Odyssey keeps this up, it will enter my top 5 games of all time which currently stands as the following: World of Warcraft (played for 6 years), Diablo 3 + expansion (over 3,000 hours played across 3 or 4 years), Metal Gear Solid 5 (118 hours), The Witcher 3 (180 hours), and Saints Row The Third (128 hours). All of those are very game play-focused games with interesting systems and high replay value or just tons of engaging content.

Having said all of that, Odyssey is an action RPG and very different from most entries in the series. If you don't like the concepts of leveling and stats (which includes possibly not successfully one-shot assassinating certain enemies unless you're high enough level with the right gear and specialization) or if you just want to rush the main story without dealing with any side content (of which I'd argue that there's a lot of quality content such that you can mostly avoid doing the boring, repetitive fluff) or you don't like the idea of exploring a vast, lush, colourful open world, then perhaps this game is not for you.

 

[Xaero Gravity]

I'm not much of an AC fan. I liked 1 and the 2 trilogy but was bored with 3 and 4 and then I stopped playing the series entirely because it all seemed like the same tired formula. The thing that I didn't like the most about the AC series was that, if you were eventually seen, the open combat really, really sucked, mostly consisting of waiting for an enemy to attack and then countering. Origins really peaked my interest with its completely revamped, action RPG game play, and I really enjoyed it! It also helped that Bayek and Aya were interesting characters to me, and I enjoyed the more personal-feeling themes of parenthood and family.

With Odyssey, I'm 33 hours in at level 28 out of 50, and I'm absolutely loving this game! According to the Uplay stats, I am only 26% done the main story, and this is because there is just so much content. Now, much of that content could be considered filler depending on how much you enjoy doing them: random forts; randomly generated kill & fetch quests with throwaway characters and plots that you get from a message board; the faction region control and conquest battles where you fight alongside an army; and the puzzles where you have a clue to guide you to a treasure location. There are, however, plenty of, in my opinion, good-to-excellent "main" side quests spread out across the lands. I would argue that these are often close to the same quality level as The Witcher 3's side quests with a lot of attention to detail (being able to do steps out of sequence or doing something unconventional while having these acknowledged with different outcomes; multi-quest storylines that span multiple regions with unique characters, dialogue, and consequences), but it's hard for me to directly compare them since W3 was generally much more serious in tone while Odyssey is, I feel, more varied with a lot of lighthearted but also really dark moments. I really, really liked The Witcher 3 (180 hours played, bought the collector's edition which wasn't even available in my country of Canada. I should also disclose that I bought the Spartan Edition of Odyssey since it seemed to mimic a lot of what I liked about W3), and this is an informed but premature opinion, but I am actually debating with myself over whether I like Odyssey more than The Witcher 3. I believe that the main and side stories of W3 were better written but the game play of Odyssey is much better with far less inventory management and more responsive and varied combat (I really liked W3's combat, but it's hard to beat the assassination/bow/Spartan-kicking trifecta of Odyssey). If Odyssey keeps this up, it will enter my top 5 games of all time which currently stands as the following: World of Warcraft (played for 6 years), Diablo 3 + expansion (over 3,000 hours played across 3 or 4 years), Metal Gear Solid 5 (118 hours), The Witcher 3 (180 hours), and Saints Row The Third (128 hours). All of those are very game play-focused games with interesting systems and high replay value or just tons of engaging content.

Having said all of that, Odyssey is an action RPG and very different from most entries in the series. If you don't like the concepts of leveling and stats (which includes possibly not successfully one-shot assassinating certain enemies unless you're high enough level with the right gear and specialization) or if you just want to rush the main story without dealing with any side content (of which I'd argue that there's a lot of quality content such that you can mostly avoid doing the boring, repetitive fluff) or you don't like the idea of exploring a vast, lush, colourful open world, then perhaps this game is not for you.

For the record, the Witcher 3 CE was available in Canada, but it was an EB exclusive

 

[RPGCrazied]

Loving the game so far, just wish the framerate could have been better on base PS4. It rears its ugly head in Athens.