Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Glebee

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

You put it up there with the witcher 3, content wise or quality wise?

I've tried to play this game twice but it's just so bland I put it down and don't go back to it. Combat, gameplay and story are all passable but it's not engaging in the slightest.

I recently played Far Cry 5 too, same issue. Throwaway story and the gameplay just becomes monotonous and I'm left with little reason to keep playing other than to finish what I started, which I then inevitably don't.

I blame games like the Witcher 3 or Divinty Original Sin II for turning me off Ubisoft games. It's not familiarity's fault anyway as the last one I played was Far Cry 3.

Agreed withthe Ubisopft stuff alright, I played through Farcry:Primal recently and by the end I just wanted it to be over. It was good for a while but then just got monotonous but isnt that always the way towards the end of Farcry games.

blockfighter

I'm about 10 hours in to this and personally this is the game i wanted The Witcher 3 to be. I found there was too many systems to keep track of in The Witcher. Spent more time in menus figuring out if i had the right ingredients for potions. And if you went a week or 2 without playing it, good luck trying to remember how everything works again.
Odyssey is much more jump in and play. I spent very little time doing busy work in menus and much more time doing stealth kills and boat ramming.
I really enjoyed Witcher 3 too but it's not for someone like me who can go days or weeks without getting the chance to properly sit down and play.

Skerries

I have tried to play previous AC games but just couldn't get in to them at all despite owning 16 of them but after trying several including Origins, Odyssey was actually playable for me
We're not talking The Witcher obviously but when RPG fantasy games like these are few and far between I will try them and if they are passable then I will give them a chance
I decided to try it after I heard good things about it and when I got a free month of Ubisoft I bought a key for the ultimate edition

brady12

Having not played origins or odyssey which one should I play first ?

tusk

blockfighter wrote: »

I'm about 10 hours in to this and personally this is the game i wanted The Witcher 3 to be. I found there was too many systems to keep track of in The Witcher. Spent more time in menus figuring out if i had the right ingredients for potions. And if you went a week or 2 without playing it, good luck trying to remember how everything works again.
Odyssey is much more jump in and play. I spent very little time doing busy work in menus and much more time doing stealth kills and boat ramming.
I really enjoyed Witcher 3 too but it's not for someone like me who can go days or weeks without getting the chance to properly sit down and play.

Had the very same issues with The Witcher. It's great game, but it takes serious committment to actually be able to stick with it. I think I got about a hundred hours in, and barely scratched the surface.

Everytime i go back to carry on, I'm just lost and give up.

Sephiroth_dude

brady12 wrote: »

Having not played origins or odyssey which one should I play first ?

Doesn't really matter but I would play origins first.

tusk

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Odyssey is Origins but better in almost every conceivable way

aside from story imo

Sephiroth_dude

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I think you should play Origins first but if I'm being entirely honest I think you should skip Origins altogether.

Odyssey is Origins but better in almost every conceivable way which is why if you are going to play both it would be better to play Origins first so you can go from good to great rather than feeling like you're playing a lesser version of a game you've already played.

You're missing out on a very beautiful detailed world though.

CatInABox

I found the world in Origins so much more interesting, to be honest. Odyssey is definitely the better game, but I missed the vast scale of the desert in Origins. I'm aware that Odyssey has a bigger world, but a lot of it is ocean, and there was never an area of the game that made me feel I'm all alone, with no one around for miles.

Sephiroth_dude

CatInABox wrote: »

I found the world in Origins so much more interesting, to be honest. Odyssey is definitely the better game, but I missed the vast scale of the desert in Origins. I'm aware that Odyssey has a bigger world, but a lot of it is ocean, and there was never an area of the game that made me feel I'm all alone, with no one around for miles.

This, exploring the area around the pyramids was brilliant .

Midnight_EG

Origins was the epitome of what an RPG world should be, it was surreal and amazing and the detail such as heatstroke when you spend too long in the desert... Class!

recyclops

Odyssey is great for around 20 hours or so. Then it gets more and more tedious/bland as said.

Naval combat is woefully compared to previous games but that was to be expected, the bounty hunters become more annoying when attacking forts (I just pay them off)

It just gets so repetitive so quickly I turned it off one day and never properly returned I tried twice and each time when I galloped to a Fort picked up treasure, released prisoner, burnt supplied and killed two specific people I remember why I stopped.

tusk

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I thought the story in Origins was one of the worst in the series, almost as bad as Unity. Bayek was a good character but the story surrounding him was yet another revenge tale. It never really shows how the brotherhood formed step by step, just tacks it on at the end to justify it being an Assassin's Creed game.

Yeah it was more the Aya stuff that I thought was very good. But the whole lack of brotherhood was a big let down.

I thought the story in Odyssey was garbage tbh

brady12

I’m 20 hours into origins and I’m getting absolutely I burnt of fetch side quests to level up to progress the story . I hate leaving games but Iv yet play odyssey let alone Valhalla so is it worth sticking with it to finish story ? The setting is beautiful & re creation of ancient Egypt is class . Probably another 10+ Hours to finish the story ?

tusk

yeah the story is worth it. but don't expect much enlightenment or anything like that. You could easily not play it and miss eff all. But i enjoyed the story nonetheless

dreamers75

Spoilers for pretty much all the games.

https://www.gamesradar.com/uk/assassins-creed-timeline/

Complete overview of the timeline.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

I've always said that Odyssey is the better version of Origins because it's made by a different team (Quebec).
Origins is peak Montreal. They introduce really cool mechanics and mission structures and then proceed to repeat said activity ad nauseam until you're exhausted by it because they don't understand how to overlap systems like Quebec does.

Sorry for the bump.

But just started this last weekend. Love it! Didn't know it two different teams are doing AC. Makes sense, I couldn't believe how quickly one released from the other.

Odyssey is the AC game I've been waiting for. Haven't plan an AC game since 2015 or thereabouts. I'm always left disappointed by them and stop playing after 15 hours.

Odyssey is another beast. My only complain might be that there's too much? I would hate anyone to say there is too much content in any of my fav games, so I realise "too much" is subjective. Overall, I'm really happy with it.

Looking forward to playing Valhalla. Which studio made that?

Midnight_EG

Turquoise Hexagon Sun wrote: »

Sorry for the bump.

But just started this last weekend. Love it! Didn't know it two different teams are doing AC. Makes sense, I couldn't believe how quickly one released from the other.

Odyssey is the AC game I've been waiting for. Haven't plan an AC game since 2015 or thereabouts. I'm always left disappointed by them and stop playing after 15 hours.

Odyssey is another beast. My only complain might be that there's too much? I would hate anyone to say there is too much content in any of my fav games, so I realise "too much" is subjective. Overall, I'm really happy with it.

Looking forward to playing Valhalla. Which studio made that?

Montreal. I got Valhalla the day it came out and I'm still not finished it with about 85 hours in. It's very repetitive but I enjoyed Odyssey's gameplay more, I think I had about 160 hours into that before I finished the main story. Never bothered with the Atlantis stuff.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun

You've certainly sunk a few hours in and got your value for money!

Yeah with the new RPG elements, I'm finally into AC! And I'm about 30hrs into Odyssey and only now have I got to Animus stuff, which I really don't care for. Even how they reconstruct the world after you unpause sort of reminding you that you're in a simulation bothers me. But that's it.

I love the sense of exploration, taking over forts, and the seafaring stuff. The world is just gorgeous too. Also, visited a real place I have been in Crete and took a screenshot from the same angle, I took from my drone when I was there! Mad stuff! Super scaled-down but you can see it's the same place.

A few screens..

Potential-Monke

Enjoy Odyssey, because if you're like me, Valhalla is a step down. I just can't get into it, but I did play Immortals inbetween and as Phantom Pain says, Immortals is a really fun game. Must have over 140 hours into Odyssey. Loved it all. With Kassandra though.

skerry

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Enjoy Odyssey, because if you're like me, Valhalla is a step down. I just can't get into it, but I did play Immortals inbetween and as Phantom Pain says, Immortals is a really fun game. Must have over 140 hours into Odyssey. Loved it all. With Kassandra though.

I must give Odyssey another go. I picked up Valhalla as it was the only seemingly decent option for a next gen open world game. Played about 25 hours and I'm struggling to find the motivation to pick it up again. I started Odyssey a good while back but I picked the male character and he's not in the least bit likeable as a main character. Might give it a go with Kassandra. I do enjoy the odd mindless open world romp.

Kiith

Odyssey was a better game for me. I only got 10 or so hours into Valhalla, but i was drawn into the Odyssey setting far quicker then Valhalla. I'll give it another go at some stage, but definitely a step down from Odyssey.

Turquoise Hexagon Sun

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

Other than RDR2 I've never spammed photo mode so much. I have hundreds and hundreds of photos from Odyssey alone on my hard drive.

As mentioned upthread, Montreal made Valhalla and it shows for better and worse. In the AC community there's a divided fanbase. The Quebec fans like me and the Montreal fans. Both dev teams have two distinct styes in that Quebec are a "gameplay first" team and are not afraid to break rules of canon or realism if it means the gameplay is fun (for instance the decision to negate fall damage after level 20 so that getting around in a massive map full of mountains isn't a slog.) Montreal are obsessed with immersion at the expense of quality of life and while a lot of their gameplay systems are fun at first they quickly become tiresome. The tones of their games are also very different with Quebec favouring a more light-hearted approach with emphasis on Disney-esque "goodness" whereas Montreal isn't afraid to show a dude ripping out another dude's spine or someone's leg getting soared off. I prefer the former approach if I'm being honest..............
Quebec also made the lovely Immortals Fenyx Rising, a game that pretty much everyone I know really likes.

I hear you with the photo mode! I was the same for RDR2 as well! Such photogenic games!

Interesting indeed. I obviously haven't played enough of each studio to form my own opinion but I'll try not to let what you said to me for being biased. I do enjoy the idea of a man getting his spine ripped out, however, I don't favour realism where it stunts potentially fun gameplay (although this is a highly subjective topic).

On the topic of Montreal vs Quebec, I also read that the Montreal studio that made 1, 2, Brotherhood, 3 and Unity doesn't exist any more and a newer studio in Montreal has been in charge of Black Flag and Origins. I'm not sure how much of that is true and how much that means, 'a new studio' but it certainly makes a little sense to me given Black Flag and Origins seemed to be big games with bigger, more progressive shifts in the series. But I think there are too many studios and many variables to attribute differences to being a typical Montreal or typical Quebec game - in my limited knowledge of the subject.

Anyway, Odyessy is a nice return for me to the series. I reckon I could have sang praises for AC again if it was origins or Valhalla. From what I see for Valhalla and Odyssey, they don't look that much different other than the setting? This is the issue I face. I think if I jump into Valhalla right after Odyssey, I'll be burnt out. It's not too different a game. The best thing I can do is play Starfield (space RPG) and maybe a sports game in between before I return to Assassin's Creed.

I find they release games almost too frequently. I don't see anyone being invested equally in two AC titles back to back. I don't think it's possible for most people (generally speaking). I'll probably end up playing Valhalla when it's dirt cheap, sometime in 2021/2022. I really want to play it but there's no point in my thinking about it too much as Im invested in Odyssey.

Zero-Cool

So, looking for an Assassin's Creed fix for months now, Valhalla never appealed to me reading reviews and comments on here. I played Odyssey for 4 hours and sold out. I remember thinking it's a great game but it wasn't grabbing me. I'm not a fan of the rpg AC games. Was tempted to get the Ezio trilogy but having played them all (plat on 2, almost in brotherhood) i felt they were too old and I'd already played them so much.

Decided to go back to Odyssey, got it for 13 euro currently on sale on psn. Going into it with the expectation of an rpg with AC elements instead of the other way around and really enjoyed the quick go i had.

However, my head is melted with the map, there's so much to do and i have no recollection of the story. I believe I'm on chapter 3 and currently just doing main (yellow) quests as long as they're a similar level to me. To my pleasant surprise, in my first mission author, i was able to climb a building and assassinate a guy from above, such a great feeling but definitely missing the hidden blade.

I need to look up some tips and controls to get off on the right foot and hope i can get stuck into it properly.

Potential-Monke

I've heard that you can concentrate on builds better than before, so you can make an Assassin build, fighter biuld, etc. Think you might even be able to switch between them now... not sure on that though. And yeah, if you follow the main story you should remain around the same level, but if you go off doing side stuff you'll overlevel the main quests quite quickly. Or the other way around, can't remember...