Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Frisbee · 15-06-2018 11:54am

Not sure about this. Origins was the first AC I bought on launch since Black Flag. This looks like it's really just a re-badged version of Origins. I think they might have been better off taking the year out again this year and releasing something good next year.

I will play it eventually but given it is out around the same time as Spiderman and Red Dead I'll be waiting until the trade in bins are full of them.

bigphil2 · 15-06-2018 11:59am

Frisbee wrote: »

Not sure about this. Origins was the first AC I bought on launch since Black Flag. This looks like it's really just a re-badged version of Origins. I think they might have been better off taking the year out again this year and releasing something good next year.

I will play it eventually but given it is out around the same time as Spiderman and Red Dead I'll be waiting until the trade in bins are full of them.

Spiderman looks great but i think that'll be my 12days of xmas psn sale game..

Penn · 15-06-2018 12:09pm

Frisbee wrote: »

Not sure about this. Origins was the first AC I bought on launch since Black Flag. This looks like it's really just a re-badged version of Origins. I think they might have been better off taking the year out again this year and releasing something good next year.

I will play it eventually but given it is out around the same time as Spiderman and Red Dead I'll be waiting until the trade in bins are full of them.

I'm actually surprised they're releasing one this year. I thought they were moving away from annual releases as people get burned out on them. Thought they were going to alternate between AC and Watch Dogs.

nix · 15-06-2018 12:16pm

Penn wrote: »

I'm actually surprised they're releasing one this year. I thought they were moving away from annual releases as people get burned out on them. Thought they were going to alternate between AC and Watch Dogs.

They will say anything to get people to buy their games, when they see decline again, they will regurgitate that horse shit again..

They will squeeze everything they can out of the origin make up before taking "another year out" to make up the next one. And then do the same thing with that, while making claims of "we've listened to the fans" :rolleyes:

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 12:46pm

I don't mind personally, I think so long as they take a break every couple of years or so, then it should be fine.

It's also a different studio doing this one than Origins, so they've been working on it for a few years as well at this stage.

Penn · 15-06-2018 12:54pm

CatInABox wrote: »

I don't mind personally, I think so long as they take a break every couple of years or so, then it should be fine.

It's also a different studio doing this one than Origins, so they've been working on it for a few years as well at this stage.

Yeah there were always different studios working on the others too, usually a 3-year cycle for some of them. I just think it burns people out on the formula, and particularly with the old Ubisoft formula, and it means fewer new features or innovation between games.

At least between Syndicate and Origins, the took that time off and completely changed the entire combat system, brought in the RPG elements, crafting etc. I'm not saying they'd need that big of a change between Origins and Odyssey, particularly given how well received Origins was. But they could risk burning people out on the game and formula again.

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 1:36pm

Penn wrote: »

Yeah there were always different studios working on the others too, usually a 3-year cycle for some of them. I just think it burns people out on the formula, and particularly with the old Ubisoft formula, and it means fewer new features or innovation between games.

At least between Syndicate and Origins, the took that time off and completely changed the entire combat system, brought in the RPG elements, crafting etc. I'm not saying they'd need that big of a change between Origins and Odyssey, particularly given how well received Origins was. But they could risk burning people out on the game and formula again.

Yeah, I agree, I think slight tweaks between Origins and Odyssey will be fine to keep it fresh. The game after Odyssey though, that'll need something more I think.

marcbrophy · 15-06-2018 1:47pm

CatInABox wrote: »

It's also a different studio doing this one than Origins, so they've been working on it for a few years as well at this stage.

That seems to be the one constant thing that people forget when criticising AC releases. It's not a 1 year dev cycle. It just comes out yearly. Many different AC teams exist within Ubi. There was probably no plan to release a 2016 title from as far back as 2013/4

Rory28 · 15-06-2018 1:58pm

The last AC I played was black flag. I have unity and syndicate and maybe another one in my library but never played them. I was completely burnt out on the old model of the game. I love the look of the new one. Going down the RPG route is a great move imo. By the sounds of it Origins is like this game but RPG lite. I doubt I need to play the other games to appreciate origins so I will skip all of them and jumo into origins over the weekend.

I am really looking forward to Odyssey.

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 2:00pm

Rory28 wrote: »

The last AC I played was black flag. I have unity and syndicate and maybe another one in my library but never played them. I was completely burnt out on the old model of the game. I love the look of the new one. Going down the RPG route is a great move imo. By the sounds of it Origins is like this game but RPG lite. I doubt I need to play the other games to appreciate origins so I will skip all of them and jumo into origins over the weekend.

I am really looking forward to Odyssey.

Syndicate is alright actually, but does eventually suffer from being too familiar. Origins really has reignited my interest in this series.

Penn · 15-06-2018 2:12pm

CatInABox wrote: »

Syndicate is alright actually, but does eventually suffer from being too familiar. Origins really has reignited my interest in this series.

Unity was where I dropped out, having been a huge fan of the series up until then. Played a couple of hours but every time I looked at the map and saw all the icons, I just lost all enthusiasm for playing. It was all the same things as previous games over and over again. At least Black Flag had the awesome piracy and ship stuff, which really mixed it up (though the land missions were repetitive as f*ck).

I did hear Syndicate was supposed to be pretty good, but just couldn't bring myself to play it. Origins I played for maybe two hours one evening but just couldn't get into it. Really disliked using the eagle to tag enemies.

Think I will give this a shot though. I think if I burst through enough and get used to the combat and eagle I could really like this game.

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 2:33pm

Penn wrote: »

Think I will give this a shot though. I think if I burst through enough and get used to the combat and eagle I could really like this game.

Took me a good few hours to get used to Origins, but worth it once I did.

EDIT: Also, with the eagle and tagging, it gets easier as you play. The more viewpoints that you sync, the more perceptive you get, or something like that. The small circle for tagging turns into a giant one by the time you get them all.

bigphil2 · 15-06-2018 2:35pm

Penn wrote: »

Origins I played for maybe two hours one evening but just couldn't get into it. Really disliked using the eagle to tag enemies.

Think I will give this a shot though. I think if I burst through enough and get used to the combat and eagle I could really like this game.

Origins is great but takes a few hours to get going,once it does though..

Penn · 15-06-2018 2:43pm

bigphil2 wrote: »

Origins is great but takes a few hours to get going,once it does though..

I nearly don't want to play it now though that Odyssey will be out this year. Then I'll definitely get burned out when I play Odyssey and go back to square one. Might still return to it at some point in the future.

aaronjumper · 15-06-2018 3:58pm

Nothing wrong with taking a break from the series if you're getting tired of the formula.
I skipped Rogue and Unity, only jumped back in for Syndicate, picked up Origins a month or two ago, loving it so far.

I'll keep an eye on this but it won't be a day one for me. I'll either wait until a few months down the line or take another break from the series.
It's not going anywhere.

Frisbee · 15-06-2018 5:01pm

CatInABox wrote: »

It's also a different studio doing this one than Origins, so they've been working on it for a few years as well at this stage.

I could be way off but looks like Ubisoft Montreal were credited as Devs for Origins and are one of a number of Devs for Odyssey. The gameplay and aesthetics look extremely similar. I get there is only so much they can change but Odyssey just isn't showing enough "new" for me so far to be looked at as anything but an almost expansion pack.

Would be delighted to be proven wrong as we see more gameplay.

Icyseanfitz · 15-06-2018 5:17pm

Does it trigger anyone but me that a load of these pseudo historical games these days are coming out with female characters (PC or NPC) in roles that just wouldn't have been anybit acceptable in the period they are portraying? Female Spartan warrior, female samurai warrior etc.
I'm all for strong female characters but at least try to make it somewhat believable.

johnnysmack · 15-06-2018 5:17pm

Only played the ezio collection for the first time last year and loved it, recently did black flag and again enjoyed it even if the only interesting part of the story was the introduction of the sage. Currently on unity and hate it.

No interest in Arno and im just running through the story not collecting anything even though getting near 100% in the previous games. I think I'm one of the few that are more interested in the present day story than the past with the exception of ezio because he had a 3 game arch to get fully invested in him.

The present day is the only consistent story through the series while each game is like a quick chapter on random people. I'd like to see a future character get a multi game arch and get as invested in them as ezio.

Also wonder will they ever go back so far that they base a story on the first humans rebelling against the first race. That could be a great story if done right.

nix · 15-06-2018 5:19pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Does it trigger anyone but me that a load of these pseudo historical games these days are coming out with female characters (PC or NPC) in roles that just wouldn't have been anybit acceptable in the period they are portraying? Female Spartan warrior, female samurai warrior etc.
I'm all for strong female characters but at least try to make it somewhat believable.

Don't be silly, they need to appeal to the masses that don't play their games, or any games for that matter.

:pac:

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 5:21pm

Frisbee wrote: »

I could be way off but looks like Ubisoft Montreal were credited as Devs for Origins and are one of a number of Devs for Odyssey. The gameplay and aesthetics look extremely similar. I get there is only so much they can change but Odyssey just isn't showing enough "new" for me so far to be looked at as anything but an almost expansion pack.

Would be delighted to be proven wrong as we see more gameplay.

Montreal were the lead devs on Origins, with Quebec being lead devs this time around. Of course, the nature of modern game development means that no one studio does everything in a series like this, so it's a safe bet that both studios helped each other out in a massive way.

Kiith · 15-06-2018 5:26pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Does it trigger anyone but me that a load of these pseudo historical games these days are coming out with female characters (PC or NPC) in roles that just wouldn't have been anybit acceptable in the period they are portraying? Female Spartan warrior, female samurai warrior etc.
I'm all for strong female characters but at least try to make it somewhat believable.

Historical accuracy doesn't exactly matter to the always offended. If there are no women, it's sexist. No non-white people, it's racist etc...

Although historical accuracy isn't a term i tend to use when talking about Assassins Creed :pac:

Icyseanfitz · 15-06-2018 5:33pm

Yeah I remember the explosion of crap for there not being people of a certain colour in kingdom come deliverance even though they didn't exist or if they did where extremely rare there in that time period.

I just recall watching a gameplay demo for this where the female Spartan player character is kicking a 300lb man around

I can suspend my disbelief a certain amount but lately it's getting worse.

Ghost of toshima was really gripping me until bang, female samurai

at least make her a ninja or something.

Penn · 15-06-2018 5:49pm

Historical accuracy can only take you so far. AC2 was the best game in the series imo, and one of my favourite games of all time. And at the end of it, you fight the Pope.

Ultimately I think when it comes to history and the roles women played then, unless the game is actually striving to be historically accurate, then it just doesn't matter. It's their take and their story based on historical events, not trying to replicate them. Likewise Battlefield took a bit of sh*t when they reveal female characters, but at E3 they were very clear to say "In our version of WW2..."

Personally I like it when the devs do such things. I was actually thinking I might play as the female character in this (forget her name). The last few years I've done so when I've had the chance mainly to see how the game still works playing as a female character (eg. is dialogue of npcs noticeably adjusted or ungendered by default, or do they use it as part of the story etc) and because a lot of the time, male protagonists just end up being so similar. Even with create a character mine always ended up looking the same in every game. I'd put short dark hair on him, get bored of the CaC and just default the rest to start playing the game.

Icyseanfitz · 15-06-2018 5:55pm

Don't get me wrong I often play a female character depending on the game, female shepherd in mass effect was awesome and believable for me, like wise even soldiers in ww2 wouldn't be too bad as guns and technology existed to equalise things. Just can't get my head around Samurai/Spartan as they where exclusively male for a reason.

Dr. Bre · 15-06-2018 6:06pm

Out around the same time as read dead and because it’s only a year after origins I won’t buy odyssey straight away

Penn · 15-06-2018 6:17pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Don't get me wrong I often play a female character depending on the game, female shepherd in mass effect was awesome and believable for me, like wise even soldiers in ww2 wouldn't be too bad as guns and technology existed to equalise things. Just can't get my head around Samurai/Spartan as they where exclusively male for a reason.

That's what I'm wondering and one of the reasons I play as the female character; is her story about her being a woman and not being allowed to be a Spartan but that something happens to necessitate it or allow it (like the spear weapon she holds gives her extra strength to be comparable to that of a Spartan or greater)? Which would mean she and the guy character may have different stories altogether.

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 6:45pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

Does it trigger anyone but me that a load of these pseudo historical games these days are coming out with female characters (PC or NPC) in roles that just wouldn't have been anybit acceptable in the period they are portraying? Female Spartan warrior, female samurai warrior etc.
I'm all for strong female characters but at least try to make it somewhat believable.

Let me get this straight. In a game that features a remote control Eagle, the ability to fall several hundred feet in a bale of hay without a scratch, and several other feats of superheroism, a playable woman character is where you draw the line?

If you want historical accuracy, read a history book, to be honest.

Icyseanfitz · 15-06-2018 6:58pm

CatInABox wrote: »

Let me get this straight. In a game that features a remote control Eagle, the ability to fall several hundred feet in a bale of hay without a scratch, and several other feats of superheroism, a playable woman character is where you draw the line?

If you want historical accuracy, read a history book, to be honest.

It's not the playable female character as I've explained above, it's shoehorning a woman into a role that only males where allowed to historically fill in order to avoid their damn game being called sexist.

I'm not looking for historical accuracy either, I'm looking for believability, put female ww2 soldiers in all you want, anyone can use a gun male or female. But pitting a female Spartan or the like against their male counterpart would be like watching a child fighting an adult imo.

Also who am I to say a remote control eagle can't exist or superhumans can't exist, hell who knows but what I can say is that female samurai and spartan warriors did not exist.

Shiminay · 15-06-2018 7:08pm

Meanwhile, on Twitter...

Also: Historical Accuracy and Blideo Blames are, barring a few very rare exceptions, mutually exclusive and you have to ask yourself if you *really* want to be on the same team as the sorts of screaming manbabies that are proud to have harassed a woman off Twitter cause she had the audacity to be a woman in a Star Wars film?

I enjoyed Origins a lot more than I expected to. I do consider myself a fan of the series generally despite its very real flaws. Right now I can see both an Edward Conway and Ratonhnhaké:ton/Conor statues on top of my shelf (both of which I got for €30 in Gamestop by waiting a year), so there're my colours nailed to the mast (if you'll excuse the pun). Origins added some nice changes and I'm looking forward to seeing an expansion on this with the next one, but again, I'm not going to be buying it until 6ish months in at least (mostly cause I'm done buying games at launch when I have so many fine games to play and no real rush to play what's new).

But dialogue trees and decisions having branching results is a good move as long as they don't hand-wave all player agency away at the end of the game cause they have to shoe-horn it into some sort of ending.

CatInABox · 15-06-2018 7:11pm

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

It's not the playable female character as I've explained above, it's shoehorning a woman into a role that only males where allowed to historically fill in order to avoid their damn game being called sexist.

I'm not looking for historical accuracy either, I'm looking for believability, put female ww2 soldiers in all you want, anyone can use a gun male or female. But pitting a female Spartan or the like against their male counterpart would be like watching a child fighting an adult imo.

Also who am I to say a remote control eagle can't exist or superhumans can't exist, hell who knows but what I can say is that female samurai and spartan warriors did not exist.

Considering the lack of information from that era, you're going to rule out the possibility of a female spartan, but rule in the possibility of a remote control eagle?

Also, female samurai.

Assassin's Creed Odyssey

Comments