assassins creed odyssey

[Cosmic Janitor]

Question: Does the game have an online component I have to worry about and does it call home regularily? I'm interested in getting it because I'm interested in the setting, but if they fucked up the balancing Shadow of War style then I just want to be able to edit my way out of that shit without throwing money or my time at these twats.

[WintersLegion]

Question: Does the game have an online component I have to worry about and does it call home regularily? I'm interested in getting it because I'm interested in the setting, but if they fucked up the balancing Shadow of War style then I just want to be able to edit my way out of that shit without throwing money or my time at these twats.

No the only online component is seeing pictures that people have taken.

[Champagne Supernova]

And plat. Until DLC comes out. About 100 hours, though i did everything, probably around 80 or so hours for the sane people.



Now i'll probably look into red dead redemption 2, to keep me somewhat busy until Hitman 2.

[rhorle]

Stop throwing cliche's around like "victim card" and stop picking and choosing whatever small parts of my words you want to target because you cant defend against the rest or against it as a whole.

Says the person who didn't actually answer the question I asked of you. Seriously. The game is designed around never buying a micro transaction. It is as simple as that. Those that want to speed up the game can by the time savers. They are by no means needed. XP isn't an issue. Gold isn't an issue. This isn't Shadow of War. Stop using stereotypes and non-specific statements.

You haven't provided one bit of evidence that micro transactions are damaging the game or even franchise. Ubisoft seems to be well off and AC is as popular as ever. Even diehard anti-transactions have bought the game. That should tell you a lot. They are not literally designing for such individuals because the game can be played with out ever buying an XP booster or anything from the in-game shop.

That means they are literally not designing the game for such individuals. They are adding it as an option for those who want to buy such things even if they are relatively useless. Yes it may be seen as preying on the stupid. But such is life. There are tons of sayings about a fool and their money. You can't design a game solely around people that have no willpower to choose.

[Witchblade77]

so i have a random question. do other people's playstations work differently from mine? because I keep seeing people take pictures of their screens with phones but.. there is a screenshot button. its great. why not use it?

[Guardian Bob]

I...hope you don't take his reviews super seriously. Because they're not, and that's kinda his schtick.

Kinda is, but most reviewers try to be funny. So far there's Dunkey, AngryJoe, Iron Pineapple, and Yatzhee who all don't know what they're talking about. Pray tell me who do you consider to have a legitimate review?

https://www.mcvuk.com/business/us-ch...-lead-the-pack

And Odyssey seems to continue to do fine financially.

Considering it's based on September and October sales, that doesn't scream success to me. No actual numbers were given, other than a rank to show who sold most. Marvel's Spider-Man is good, but not a multi-platform game like Odyssey which should have done better because it's on PS4,Xbone, and PC. Shadow of War sold fine, just not as well as Shadow of Mordor.

Wait when Red Dead Redemption 2 sales are out. Unless they screw up with micro-transactions I can see that game beating everyone. No PC release though, but still should do better.

[Witchblade77]

whenever I see people talk about red dead 2 and the fanaticism with which they speak about it.. all I can do is shake my head and continue to ignore it. I have ZERO desire having to manage eating just right amounts of food, or fiddling with clothes in a name of authenticity. if I want to micromanage basic functions, I can do that in RL already, I don't need a video game to do that. but hey, to each their own and all that. I'm enjoying being a fictional pirate/mercenary so much more then playing a depressing story that has as much of an illusion of choice as AC Oddysey, possibly even less of a choice judging by reviews I'm reading.

I mean.. talk about the irony of complaining about busywork... while singing praises to the game where so much of it is.. oh ye - busywork.

[Tech614]

whenever I see people talk about red dead 2 and the fanaticism with which they speak about it.. all I can do is shake my head and continue to ignore it. I have ZERO desire having to manage eating just right amounts of food, or fiddling with clothes in a name of authenticity. if I want to micromanage basic functions, I can do that in RL already, I don't need a video game to do that. but hey, to each their own and all that. I'm enjoying being a fictional pirate/mercenary so much more then playing a depressing story that has as much of an illusion of choice as AC Oddysey, possibly even less of a choice judging by reviews I'm reading.

You don't understand how RDR2 works at all based on this post.

It's funny you bring it up in this thread though. It's an example of a game that tries to make you do side content by throwing interesting side content at you- and if that's still not a hook you don't have to do it at all.

Not raiding the same camp over and over again to complete a check list of objectives in it just to be some arbitrary level to continue the main quest when you change areas. RDR2 is a literal example of the opposite of a rushed out copy pasted open world game like ACO, and it doesn't ask you for money to skip SP content because it's interesting enough to stand on it's own feet whether then being a requirement because it's not.

Instead of having 1000 people churn out an AC game in a 2 year dev cycle maybe Ubisoft should take heed from CDPR and give 200 or so people 4 years, or like rockstar and give 400 people or so 5 years. The quality of the game shows when you give it time in the oven, Ubisoft just finds an okay formula and buries it into the ground with quickly spammed releases.

[Witchblade77]

You don't understand how RDR2 works at all based on this post.

It's funny you bring it up in this thread though. It's an example of a game that tries to make you do side content by throwing interesting side content at you- and if that's still not a hook you don't have to do it at all.

Not raiding the same camp over and over again to complete a check list of objectives in it just to be some arbitrary level to continue the main quest when you change areas. RDR2 is a literal example of the opposite of a rushed out copy pasted open world game like ACO, and it doesn't ask you for money to skip SP content because it's interesting enough to stand on it's own feet whether then being a requirement because it's not.

Instead of having 1000 people churn out an AC game in a 2 year dev cycle maybe Ubisoft should take heed from CDPR and give 200 or so people 4 years, or like rockstar and give 400 people or so 5 years. The quality of the game shows when you give it time in the oven, Ubisoft just finds an okay formula and buries it into the ground with quickly spammed releases.

except for that whole... must eat at regular intervals just the right amount or you get fat or malnourished. the busywork of managing clothes. the busiwork of skinning animals, of watching cards shuffle of so ... much... padding of the minutia. but I guess that boring stuff is ok, because IMMURCION! or something.

lets just be honest here, ok? we are ALL biased in our preferences. I happen to enjoy breaking into camps and figuring out how to loot them quietly becasue they are NOT the same camp. patrol patterns are different, layout of the hiding places is different, and as such - strategy is different. I enjoy figuring out if I can go through entire camp without getting noticed, at all. I enjoy the world of greece with its temples and its colorful cities and its rudimentary yet still fun ship combat and my badass singing ship crew

you enjoy your minor minutia and your wild wild west grim and depressing - we all die horribly in the end world

and the thing is... the ONLY difference, the only REAL difference between RDR2 padding and AC padding as that yes.. AC gives you an OPTION, that you don't have to take, are NOT forced into taking in any way shape or form - to buy some stuff in a store so that you can just go back to pillaging the seas and soldier camps without a care in a world, while RDR2? makes you do all that stuff. you need money to upgrade your camp, you need money to supply your gang, so you STILL have to do all those city heists and those little jobs that pay for your basics.. you just cannot go to a shop and skip some of it. that's it. that's the difference.

[Tech614]

except for that whole... must eat at regular intervals just the right amount or you get fat or malnourished. the busywork of managing clothes. the busiwork of skinning animals, of watching cards shuffle of so ... much... padding of the minutia. but I guess that boring stuff is ok, because IMMURCION! or something.

It's clear and obvious you haven't played the game, you haven't even seen the game played and have no idea what you're talking about.

[Witchblade77]

It's clear and obvious you haven't played the game, you haven't even seen the game played and have no idea what you're talking about.

likewise cupcake when it comes to odyssey. you are spouting your bitterness based solely on reviews and personal bias.

and I did watch some gameplay and read some reviews becasue I was curious. there is so much hype about these games that I wanted to see why. not impressed, not interested. grim dark spaghetti western, I saw that movie years ago, it had Clint Eastwood in it... or was it John Wayne, not sure, never was into the genre to be arsed to remember it in that much detail. sorry.

so how about you go back to the game YOU like and stop shitting all over the game WE like and we'll do the same, mkay? becasue your complains ARE hypocritical as fuck. you LIKE the busywork in RDR2 or at least don't mind it becasue you justify it in your own preferential ways. you completely ignore when AC has its own variety when it comes to story missions and people you meet, because REEEEEEEE, microtransactions.

and btw? commute =/= gameplay. its just padding. and you don't have to use road follow function. I never do, i find it to be highly annoying and incredibly imprecise, I'd rather control my character myself.. which I can do.

[Tech614]

likewise cupcake when it comes to odyssey

Prove anything I said about ACO is wrong.

Ready for me to break down your tirade on RDR2?

-You never have to micro manage anything with eating. You can simply eat when you lose either your health, stamina or dead eye cores and this can be done simply by holding L1, selecting the item on the wheel and letting go. AKA it's the same as consumables in almost every game ever.

-You can skip all of the animations during poker

-You don't have to hunt or skin at all outside of the main story mission that gives you a tutorial on it. Purely optional.

-Clothes literally mean jack shit. Your horse can carry 3 outfits which covers all you need, and you can swap between them as easy as I said on the first line.

This is not about any biases, this is about you being wrong. You brought up RDR2 with a bump to this thread for w/e reason and started the discussion. Next time try to be accurate on your critiques when you get mad your darling game of the year has already been forgotten by the entire gaming community when a far superior game just came out. You brought up the comparison to RDR2, not my fault it shows a lot of flaws in ACO /shrug.

[Witchblade77]

Prove anything I said about ACO is wrong.

Ready for me to break down your tirade on RDR2?

-You never have to micro manage anything with eating. You can simply eat when you lose either your health, stamina or dead eye cores and this can be done simply by holding L1, selecting the item on the wheel and letting go. AKA it's the same as consumables in almost every game ever.

-You can skip all of the animations during poker

-You don't have to hunt or skin at all outside of the main story mission that gives you a tutorial on it. Purely optional.

-Clothes literally mean jack shit. Your horse can carry 3 outfits which covers all you need, and you can swap between them as easy as I said on the first line.

This is not about any biases, this is about you being wrong. You brought up RDR2 with a bump to this thread for w/e reason and started the discussion. Next time try to be accurate on your critiques when you get mad your darling game of the year has already been forgotten by the entire gaming community when a far superior game just came out. You brought up the comparison to RDR2, not my fault it shows a lot of flaws in ACO /shrug.

except when you are wrong. everything that you have mentioned, fast or not - is minutia and busiwork that you have. to. keep. doing. there are repetitive heist missions that you HAVE to do in order to progress your base, progress your gang, but they just called them "main mission" so that makes it ok apparently. but I guess you haven't gotten far enough into a game to start getting frustrated with those. or maybe you won't becasue by the sheer virtue of "they are main game, and no MT's" makes them... better or something

and I didn't actualy bring up red dead. person above me did. so yet again. you are wrong. so why don't YOU move on. play the game you like and stop wasting EVERYONE's time, including your own, shitting all over the game that you are not playing, mkay? and I'm done talking about the game I have no intention of playing past researching it for a bit and realizing that hey... that stuff people praise about it? not my cup of tea.

[Tech614]

except when you are wrong.

That's not how it works guy...

I literally posted why you where wrong, and your retort is "nuh uh you're wrong!" with no reasoning to back it up?

It's hilarious how the hypocrisy comes out. At least the people you claim didn't play ACO and don't know about it actually are educated on it quite a bit.(The game DOES have MTs that allow you to skip content and DOES require side content if you don't buy them that is a fact, meanwhile everything you claim about RDR2 is false). You literally have no idea what you're talking about with RDR2 and are describing some random game I never heard of. Where did you get these magical ideas from? Metacritic user scores?

[rhorle]

Not raiding the same camp over and over again to complete a check list of objectives in it just to be some arbitrary level to continue the main quest when you change areas.

You don't understand how RDR2 AC:Odyssey works at all based on this post.

- - - Updated - - -

Prove anything I said about ACO is wrong.

You don't do camps over and over and over again. There proved wrong. You can clear every POI once and still have plenty left over before hitting 50.

- - - Updated - - -

It's hilarious how the hypocrisy comes out.

It is funny. How you ignore everything you say yet call others hypocrites.

AC:Odyssey has no micro transactions that allow you to skip content. It requires side content but side content you would play to do the 3 main story lines. The amount of ignorance you show about Odyssey just to hate and call other people hypocrites is insane. They may have literally no idea what they are talking about with RDR2 but you are the same exact way with AC:Odyssey.

With or With out the XP boost in AC:Odyssey you are still required to do some side content. Again play the damn game. Stop being a hypocrite and mellow the hate.

[Witchblade77]

You don't understand how RDR2 AC:Odyssey works at all based on this post.

- - - Updated - - -



You don't do camps over and over and over again. There proved wrong. You can clear every POI once and still have plenty left over before hitting 50.

- - - Updated - - -



It is funny. How you ignore everything you say yet call others hypocrites.

AC:Odyssey has no micro transactions that allow you to skip content. It requires side content but side content you would play to do the 3 main story lines. The amount of ignorance you show about Odyssey just to hate and call other people hypocrites is insane. They may have literally no idea what they are talking about with RDR2 but you are the same exact way with AC:Odyssey.

With or With out the XP boost in AC:Odyssey you are still required to do some side content. Again play the damn game. Stop being a hypocrite and mellow the hate.

that is asking far too much (which is why I ignored him). and honestly? if we are perfectly honest? there is plenty of unskippable content in RDR2, that some people may and do find incredibly tedious and boring and would LOVE to minimize or downright skip. all of those little "immersion" bits, all of those repetitive robberies. some people like them. some people don't. which... is kinda the point. there are bits in AC Oddisey that some people like and some people don't - the same way I have no interest in survival elements and all the LEEEENGTHY travel of RDR2.

does it make them objectively bad and boring, just because there is MT shop? becasue in the end its what it comes down to for these people. just sheer existence of MT shop, even though its out of the way and 100% optional - just it being there, is enough to sour everything. even though in the end, not only xp boost doesn't let you skip the content and you don't even have to buy it with cash, you can buy it with ubi currency that you get for doing various achievements. yeah, it lasts 2 hours, rather then being permanent, but if you really really really REALLY for whatever reason want to minimize the time you spend in game YOU PAID FOR? its an option. and its completely not needed.

and neither are those "kill 10 soldiers, father 5 pelts" quests that keep respawning. they are 100% unnecessary, WITHOUT xp boost.

but.. pfft who needs to be honest, when you can just trash the game instead, becasue you don't like the company that published it and their sales practices... nevermind the quality of the game itself.

incidentally, MY SO was watching me play Odyssey and marveled at how pretty the game looks. because it does. just saying.

[yasiru]

No. If you are going to use that logic then paying to play the game in the first place is paying to skip content. The XP boost increases your level faster but does not allow you to skip any content. You can not out level content in Odyssey.



The mythical fights in Odyssey do not look like normal animals. You might be confusing the Herculean animals. They Mythical animals in Odyssey are the Cyclops, Minotaur etc. The Legendary animals (nemean lion, etc) are suppose to look like normal animals with small or no differences. Those creatures appear pretty much normal in greek mythology but have traits that make them different. The Nemean lion has impenetrable fur for example in the myths. In the myth heracules strangled it and use its own claw to cut it's pelt off.

But it art and stuff the lion is depicted as looking like a lion. Odyssey at least makes it white which differs from most other lions which are golden/normal.
Except they are as you can't level up to finish the mail story without doing a lot of side quests, which you can pay to boost your way to avoid most of them.

- - - Updated - - -



Do you? Opinions can be wrong. A person is just not wrong for having an opinion. A common misconception. If a person has the opinion that the world is flat does not make them correct. A person has an opinion that World of Warcraft is a Star Wars game does not make them correct. A person has the opinion that Disney makes Assasins Creed games does not make them correct.

Opinions are right or wrong all the time. Of course a person can have an opinion here. The problem is you have been discussing as if your opinion is right and others are wrong. Yet now you cry that people can't have an opinion if they disagree. Why were you arguing that X isn't a true open world game then? If we say a game is a true open world game then we have to be right because it is our opinion.

You are just throwing a fit because we didn't accept you as right just because you want to be.

Google shows you are using the wrong definition also. So yeah.


- - - Updated - - -



So do you honestly believe that Ubisoft changes the mechanics of the game based on a if a person is the type to buy or not buy micro transactions? Because that is exactly what you are saying. It isn't Ubisofts fault that some players lack the mental willpower to not buy something that is optional. You need to stop playing the victim card and understand that those people choose to buy it.

Those types of people can never be designed around. Because they have personal issues independent of any game or game developers choices.

I said in my last post not to bother replying to me as I wouldn't be back here to read it. But, on a hunch, I came back to see if you did and surprise, surprise you did reply.

See, that's the difference between you and me. I have simply been explaining how I define each of the types of open world games that I play, which there are no doubt varying degrees of openness. I haven't been trying to tell others they are wrong. You however have spent nearly every one of your posts if not every single post just disagreeing/arguing with every other person. My opinion on degrees of openness is not factually wrong or incorrect; I was talking about my opinion of how I classify the games I play. Obviously I was not referring to the world being flat or whatever. You called me dense in a previous post; who's the dense one that can't use reading comprehension to tell I am referring to these games, not everything in existence!

It's pretty obvious that you just have to have the last word and think everyone else is wrong. Please, prove me wrong by not disagreeing with this post....

Oh, and just FYI, your opening statement that i quoted makes zero sense. How would someone be paying to skip content by paying to play a game. That's the exact opposite: paying to DO content, not skip it...

[Jinxz]

I like ACOdd and RDR2, but you can clearly see RDR2 production value is miles ahead. The game does its job to be immersive.

[Eleccybubb]

Wait...

Does this game have fucking MT's in the single player mode?

Jesus Fucking Christ.........

[yasiru]

except when you are wrong. everything that you have mentioned, fast or not - is minutia and busiwork that you have. to. keep. doing. there are repetitive heist missions that you HAVE to do in order to progress your base, progress your gang, but they just called them "main mission" so that makes it ok apparently. but I guess you haven't gotten far enough into a game to start getting frustrated with those. or maybe you won't becasue by the sheer virtue of "they are main game, and no MT's" makes them... better or something

and I didn't actualy bring up red dead. person above me did. so yet again. you are wrong. so why don't YOU move on. play the game you like and stop wasting EVERYONE's time, including your own, shitting all over the game that you are not playing, mkay? and I'm done talking about the game I have no intention of playing past researching it for a bit and realizing that hey... that stuff people praise about it? not my cup of tea.

Here is something I read from a person on reddit that you might appreciate. No, this isn't sarcasm, I'm with you on how good odyssey is.

It is bizarre that RDR2 actually makes me appreciate ACOd even more.... I played 2 chapters of Red Dead Redemption 2 and I want to put it with the words of another dude in another forum named Deadule, because he nailed it and I can refer: The first 10 hours of Red Dead Redemption 2 kind of broke my heart a little. I want to love this game so much. I love the idea of RDR2 game, and that's really fitting, because Red Dead Redemption (and, seemingly, 2) was absolutely a game about loving the idea of something more than you could ever love the reality of it.

The simple act of playing RDR2 is exhausting. Everything takes twice the effort, and the time, it feels like it should. I am extremely impressed by the insane number and detail of the various animations for everything and I would actually buy several Euros of "micro"transaction or perk that would let me skip them. Characters handle like the game's being rendered in the cloud. Actually aiming any given gun in a firefight is a nightmare that Dead Eye can only partially alleviate. Controls are pointlessly convoluted. Game systems are opaque and get in the way a lot (see: resetting your loadout when you get on a horse (sometimes) or when you sleep). Even character death is inconsistent, and actively punishing open-world deaths with loss of encounter opportunities etc is awful. One system I know I hated from the first game, the ridiculous Challenges menu, is back verbatim. Multiple layers of player convenience and quality of life are sacrificed upon the altar of realism, and it was not worth it.

The real tragedy is, there is a pervasive sense of an informed guiding hand, with insight into tone, narrative, and atmosphere, and I believe many of these design decisions were made towards the goal of establishing a particular mood that would be conducive to the setting, by people who understood the impacts of these things upon video games and sought to leverage that knowledge. I firmly believe that where RDR2 is not fun, it is not fun deliberately, and to great effect. Unfortunately, the result of that is that this huge expansive open world game is kinda not very satisfying to play so far.

Maybe something or some things will click, or maybe some plot and character stuff will kick into gear, or the sheer volume of encounter missions will start charming me, or maybe I'll snap out of applying a Meta Critic Ninety-Eight's worth of expectations on this very average game with astronomical art/scenario budgets. I really hope so. I still really want to like this game.

And that's the point where I want to compare it to Assassins Creed Odyssey, where I already sunk like 50 hours in: Assassins Creed ODyssey simply wipes the floor with RDR2 in the categories pace, movement, choreography, action/fights, handling and responsiveness. The transition to RDR2 was really hard and most of the „gameplay“ was me trying stuff to break the games handholding. The lack of explanations and counter intuitive controls and slow paced story (at least in the first hours) in RDR2 is - despite the fantastic audiovisual experience and atmosphere- frustrating and makes me want to play AC Od again and finish this first.

Maybe it’s just RDR2 first hours where everything is so slow and doughy and leading to more questions („how does this work? What am I supposed to do? Am I missing something?“) and micromanaging than fun.

Maybe AC Od and RDR2 are just diametrically different open world games. I prefer fast paced action and exploring to being bound in a forced immersive corset the setting and story requires, so that cooking 5 meat pieces need 1 minute of button pressing and waiting.

So yeah, indeed, Red Dead Redemption 2 made me appreciate Assassins Creed Odyssey SO MUCH MORE, I love Kassandra (not literally, my wife might read this), I love the tons of quests, the fast paced action and the great and beautiful world. Of COURSE there are moments in AC Od as well where quests are repetitive and I had some moments where I felt I am "working" on quest tasks and making not enough progress.

The controls, movement and action of AC Od are stellar compared to RDR2 if you compare the first 10 hours of both games. And if you thought AC Od was a grind, holy hell, RDR2 defines the single player grind in every aspect now. Everything takes so long and is so slow . That's why I am back. And I won't touch RDR2 before I have finished Assassins Creed Odyssey, It feels like I have more "wohoo" and fun moments and lol, yes, pride and accomplishment after beeing done with the quest hubs.

Does anyone feel this way or am I just not made for RDR2?

TLDR: Kassandra > Arthur Morgan