Assassin's Creed Valhalla

TaintedSquirrel

TaintedSquirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
12,386
Just announced.

iyNYGY4.png

 
the Viking setting has a lot of potential and totally fits the AC aesthetic...but 3 great AC games in a row seems like it might be asking for too much...
 
M76 said:
It is not 3 games, one game with three skins.
Click to expand...

You can say that for many sequels. There were notable differences between Origins and Odyssey, with the latter continuing downhill to shit creak. I fear this will be similar.

I do hope they go back to making it a sensible action adventure game. Even without the stealth aspects it can still be a fun brawler if the story is interesting. But I fear we will be back to level gear grinding and impaling someone with an axe 30 times with this one.
 
M76 said:
It is not 3 games, one game with three skins.
Click to expand...

So much this. This will just be AC Origins with the sand swapped for snow.

I enjoyed Origins. I didn't enjoy it a second time as Odyssey. Couldn't even finish it. I won't make that mistake a third time. Im sure I'll buy it eventually, but not until it's being sold for a price befitting of the effort likely put into it (ie. not much).
 
Viper87227 said:
So much this. This will just be AC Origins with the sand swapped for snow.

I enjoyed Origins. I didn't enjoy it a second time as Odyssey. Couldn't even finish it. I won't make that mistake a third time. Im sure I'll buy it eventually, but not until it's being sold for a price befitting of the effort likely put into it (ie. not much).
Click to expand...

I got AC: Odyssey free for testing out that Google Streaming service...so I'm happy with what I paid for it :D
 
That's kinda every sequel ever. At least the ones that are designed for the same generation of hardware.
The last two AC game engines were really flexible and could probably be used for another half dozen games as long they kept the gameplay fresh.
That's the one worry I have with this one. The old AC games got into a massive rut because you would do the same things over and over again...and they did that for 8 consecutive games. That's just the main series, too. Origins and Odyssey already deviated more than most of those did, so there's hope this game won't just be a setting change.
 
Odyssey was definitely my personal GOTY in 18. I hope this will live up to it and add some new features to keep it fresh.
 
Viper87227 said:
So much this. This will just be AC Origins with the sand swapped for snow.
Click to expand...
Yes, and it's not necessarily a bad thing. Odyssey was pretty good. I liked the combat, and the sneaking, plus the story was interesting. I wouldn't mind a similar game with slightly improved combat, less level grind and a Viking backdrop. What I'm afraid of, is that Odyssey sailed on Greek architecture, but I doubt Viking architecture and towns will be half as interesting, but if we can raid English villages and towns I'm sold.
 
Viper87227 said:
So much this. This will just be AC Origins with the sand swapped for snow.

I enjoyed Origins. I didn't enjoy it a second time as Odyssey. Couldn't even finish it. I won't make that mistake a third time. Im sure I'll buy it eventually, but not until it's being sold for a price befitting of the effort likely put into it (ie. not much).
Click to expand...

I think they were both too similar. In my case, I actually played Odyssey first and after I finished the game I went back to Origins, and I didn't like it. Like, at all.
 
Odyssey is better than Origins, no question in my mind about that.

Where the latest two games have the most serious issue is just how grindy they are, and the move away from stealth.

I don't expect a game that is dealing with Vikings to get any better in this regard. It'll likely move even farther away from stealth is my guess.

I got 100 hours out of Odyssey though, and that's without even touching the DLC content. So I really won't complain about it.

I'm actually really excited to see how good the game looks given some of the improvements to the engine with Breakpoint.
 
Origins would have been better had they focused on an earlier period of Egyptian history, and not the time frame that they did.

Odyssey I actually really liked, perfect time period and they had a great game world.
 
I just finally played AC:Syndicate recently and I'm not sure if I've even picked up Odyssey yet. They need to slow down making them if they want me to pay more than bargain bin prices for them, Syndicate was worth paying more than I did for it but I believe I still had Unity and Rogue in my backlog and finally bought it when it got so cheap I couldn't justify not buying it.

While I haven't played the last couple yet there has been complaints about the series getting stale off and on since the beginning. Personally I think the series has had more change than most franchises but with the high number of AC games that they've produced many people are fatigued with the series, I feel like I've enjoyed them more by taking a longer break between them when I start to get tired of the gameplay.
 
Ebernanut said:
I just finally played AC:Syndicate recently
Click to expand...
That was the last AC game which stayed true to the original 'assassination' gameplay of the series. The ones which come after are closer to "Witcher lite" games, where it's less about stealth assassinations and more about open world gameplay with rpg style leveling and hundreds of minor quests scattered around each zone.

The series is still awesome though, looking forward to Valhalla, they might feel a little slightly bloated now but are still high quality throughout and the tech behind the games is still phenomenal.
 
Drexion said:
That was the last AC game which stayed true to the original 'assassination' gameplay of the series. The ones which come after are closer to "Witcher lite" games, where it's less about stealth assassinations and more about open world gameplay with rpg style leveling and hundreds of minor quests scattered around each zone.
Click to expand...

I realize that Origin had a big change in gameplay. My point was that the series has had a few big shifts and overall has changed more than any other series I can think of in a similar time frame but because of the frequency there's a lot of complaints whenever there isn't a major shift in gameplay mechanics. Of course whenever they do change more a bunch of people complain about that too proving that you can never please everyone.

I'm cautiously optimistic about the newer ones, I don't like grind but having more options on what to do at any given time is nice and I like rpg style character progression so I think I'll be in the camp that mostly likes the changes.

As for this one I think that Norse culture and mythology provides a lot of good source material for one of the things they've done well throughout the series which is to bring history to life(in a loosely paraphrased manner) so I'm all for it.
 
This could be game of the year. Odyssey was great. A Viking setting is even better.
 
Left the browser window opened last night, woke up to this...

Too short of trailer.. want more :)
 
I have to wonder if the female protag is confirmed, is it a different character than the named "Eivor" or will that be the name of both male and female characters (perhaps with feminine adjustments if necessary. Either given name feminization or changing a surname from Olafsson to Olafdottir for example)? EDIT: Apparently it is the latter, that Eivor will be the name no matter what and you can choose the gender. Makes sense if it works from a Viking/Scandinavian naming setup and will get around having to record "Eagle Bearer" style titles in order to not have to have masculine and feminine names for every line from other characters.

It appears from the symbology that the English Saxon King and those behind him are possibly Templar, with of course the hidden blade usage and Viking "ideology" (at least those you likely work with) are Assassins. It will be interesting to get back to a time period where Templar and Assassins are "properly" established, but I have admitted that previous games ventures into Order of the Ancients / Cult of Kosmos has been appreciated as well.

I'm also going to be very interested in what abilities Eivor will have, how much Isu bloodline / abilities / artifacts will be usable by them? In AC Odyssey, Alexios / Kassandra is particularly noteworthy as unlike every previous game (even Origins), they were "known" to be of a special bloodline and equipped with a Isu forged artifact from the beginning with the Spear. This is what enabled so many of the new combat mechanics and abilities. Not to mention their quest took them "heavily" into Isu artifacts, lore, and much more (ie their biological father and grandfather for instance etc.) and of course, by the end of the expansions you see they are WAY beyond baseline human, or even "Human with a bit of Isu heritage/DNA that lets them use Eagle Vision" the way that past AC protags have been. Setting Valhalla so late in comparison, I have to wonder if they're going to go a different direction because I don't expect they'll be able to maintain internal series consistency and be able to up the game from Odyssey in this regard, so they will have to find different ways to do things. Then again, I'm guessing its highly likely that one of the expansions in Valhalla will be something to do with Nordic mythology and that is where they can really cut-loose; after all, we've not heard too much about the Nordic pantheon Isu, so being able to go through the various Nine Realms of The World Tree Yggdrasil seems really exciting!

There's also the issue of the " present day" storyline. I assume this may be the final element of the "Layla Hassan" saga, with her being introduced in Origins and then well... what "happened" to her in Odyssey. They're going to have to resolve that somehow!
 
I'm going to enjoy it, but IMO from the few screenshots Ubi has released it looks like a rehash of the last game.

I expect the 'new' features will be something like

-Pet companions
-Some additional naval stuff
-And increased management of conquered settlements

I don't imagine the game being much different.

That being said, given the improvements to the engine with Breakpoint, I can't wait to see how good this game looks.
 
I hope they implement ships again. God that was fun in Black Flag...

As well, I know it's a sp game, but I'd love to co op the story if possible.
 
FYI be careful of VERY FAKE NEWS saying this game is "EGS exclusive". The game is on EGS & UPlay, but not Steam.
 
Mchart said:
I'm going to enjoy it, but IMO from the few screenshots Ubi has released it looks like a rehash of the last game.

I expect the 'new' features will be something like

-Pet companions
-Some additional naval stuff
-And increased management of conquered settlements

I don't imagine the game being much different.

That being said, given the improvements to the engine with Breakpoint, I can't wait to see how good this game looks.
Click to expand...

Fun naval combat is one of my most missed things from Black Flag... but just as I didn't enjoy it much in Odyssey, I don't anticipate enjoying it much here. Naval combat was fun for a ship decked out in cannons and mortars. When all you have is a bunch of arrow slingers, something get's lost. The settlement stuff they are talking about isn't of interest.

The thing that I really, really want to see is AC properly implementing all the RPG mechanics they've half-hardheartedly jacked from other, better games. For example, Odyssey introduced dialog choices and romance options, which made me think we'd be knocking on Bioware's door. But it was nowhere close. The dialogue choices were meaningless. They didn't change the flow of the conversation, they didn't change how NPCs felt about you, they didn't change the course of a quest. It wasn't really a dialog choice so much as they a fast-forward button, they gave you the option to get more or less information about a given objective, and that's it. Likewise with the romances. There was no developing relationships with NPCs or any of the things that make Bioware companions so great. There's just a handful of random NPCs that give you a "cut to black while it's implied we fucked" dialog choice. It's a stupid gimmick that did absolutely nothing for the game.

Assassins Creed's game play at it's core is fun. The setting is (ususally) interesting. It's just that everything that's there feels like it's been done just well enough to say it's there, but not well enough to stand out. It's a copy of a copy of a copy, but it manages to get billed as a AAA game because the world is big and it takes a lot of hours to get through. Ubisoft has the money and resources to make this franchise trade blows with the best-of-the-best in the action RPG arena, and I desperately wish they would, because there is so much potential there. It's a shame they are more worried about how fast they can make games than how good they can make them.
 
Viper87227 said:
The thing that I really, really want to see is AC properly implementing all the RPG mechanics they've half-hardheartedly jacked from other, better games.
Click to expand...
thats what turned me off the last couple. AC wasnt a rpg, it was a stealth action game, or so i thought...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top