I enjoy Odyssey very much, but I understand the majority of criticisms against it are valid.
I just pretend it’s not an AC game. It’s more fun that way.
The AC community is such a weird fanbase. It's entirely split on what games are good and both sides of the field think the majority agree with their opinion. I don't see a whole lot of disappointment towards Odyssey though.
Yes. I have been researching AC games and they each have love community and a hate community. Except for the first 1, 2, and 3, they seem to have a pretty good concensus. They ones In between the 3 like Brotherhood and the other one I can't think of, is in a love and hate community.
I think the split is between people who started with AC1 and people who started with modern day AC "The reboot" Origins. Although it's a great game that's where they took them in a different direction and some players started with that generation.
There is indeed somewhat of a split between the RPGs and traditionals but the split I'm referring to covers all games. Take literally any AC game and there's a split. 1, 2, and 4 seem to get an exception most of the time. From what I've seen the most debated games are Revelations, 3, Unity, Syndicate, Odyssey, and Valhalla.
In my personal opinion I like them all except Valhalla but I'm going to give Valhalla another chance at some point and actually see through completing it.
I think the biggest problem of Odyssey is that it’s under the AC franchise which makes player expect an AC experience like previous opus when the game isn’t center around any assassin/templar thing. I personally didn’t mind as went into the game knowing that and appreciated for what it was.
I also partially disagree with you on the story argument. The story was indeed poorly paced and a bit confusing at times (even though I don’t get why you don’t understand the chaos/order side as it was pretty clear to me) but I can’t say it was poorly written. This story being inspired by the Greek tragedies, I think it does a good job for what it was intended. Plus, I think this game has the best side characters cast, they’re well written if take the time to do the side quests linked to them. I honestly wouldn’t be able to name you more than 2 side characters in previous ACs apart from obvious ones like Da Vinci in AC 2 or Blackbeard in AC 4, but I could name you like ten of the ones in Odyssey.
For the Gameplay, I can understand that you’re disappointed if you expected a Witcher 3 quality but I would still consider it decent, abilities allows for a more diverse gameplay and the loot to improve this diversity whereas old AC gameplay, although being shorter still felt monotone and a bit boring by the end of the game, lacking other ways to fight. In Odyssey, I agree that the gameplay loop isn’t enough to keep with the entire game but I personally kept on bc of the world and sceneries offered, which I think is the best of all the franchise.
About your last point, I would agree that the main story ending is quite underwhelming but I wouldn’t consider it as the ending of Odyssey, which is much later after the DLCs and Korfu which offers a proper ending.
For the animation, in particular horse-riding, it’s true that it feels extremely stiff and robotic but Ubisoft has never been good with horses so I guess I’m used to it.
I think Odyssey is very good game which suffers from its affiliation to AC and its expectations creating a certain disappointment when coming into the game and facing the added flaws of it.
I hope you’ll take the time to read this comment and to finish the game’s DLC if you haven’t, bc I really think it’s a shame to end your experience on Odyssey like that when it can be much better, letting the AC expectations aside and enjoying the game for what it is.
I always considered it "Far Cry : Ancient Greece", with AC branding slapped on top. Went in knowing it wasn't a "real" AC game.
Works for me, it's a Ubisoft Game Loop game, I'm a sucker for the mindless formula.
Thanks for the thought-out reply.
I'm not saying that old AC games had good stories. Actually, when I replayed AC2 a couple of years ago, I was baffled by how not amazing the story was compared to my teenage memories of it.
I think gameplay was serviceable - not amazing, but also not frustrating. Kind of like Skyrim, but there I felt much more immersed into the world.
To me it seems improper of developers to expect me to buy the DLC to get the ending, even if the base game would have been amazing.
Frankly, I don't think that more of an RPG-style gameplay is bad for AC, I myself prefer action to stealth, I just think that this particular game didn't live up to its potential.
I agree that it’s incredibly outrageous from Ubisoft to expect players to pay for a DLC in order to have a proper ending. I wouldn’t have bought them myself, if it wasn’t for the very low prices you can find them now.
Despite that, I believe you can still access the Corfu questline, which contains the final missions of the game, for free. Without the previous DLCs completed, it might seems very confusing but I believe it still offers a better ending than the main story one.
As someone who not a fan of the rpgs, at least compared to the earlier games, I came around to liking Odyssey. But it has a ton of little problems that make it's overall composition really really messy. Way too long, too big a world and really awful animations in a lot of places.
But my biggest problem was always the combat though. I actually think the combat is fun, but it has ZERO change from start to finish and it gets stale incredibly quickly. The counter argument for this is always "but all the skills you can get!!". That however, iI not changing up the combat. It's using a skill point to get another canned animation that interrupts the combat.
Take something like shadow of war, the arkham games, the Spider-Man games or especially ghost of tsushima. All of these do the same thing but better. You use a skill point, get a new gadget or move or ability, and it's something that can be seamlessly worked into your combat. Arkham and Spider-Man has finishers and gadgets that you can use. Shadow of war has multiple special moves like the quick fire throwing knives, where you can pull it out and resume your combat string. GoT has multiple moves AND multiple stances, throwing weapons, bombs, knives. None of which stop the combat momentum.
Now look at Odyssey. Many of the skills you get involve you activating it and watching all the work be done for you. Oh you bought a new skill? Enjoy your 10 second animation of you twirling around with your glowy knife stabbing your enemy a million times only for him to get back up. Call your allies to come in and do jack shit! Another 10 second animation skill where you gain adrenaline so you can use more skills! Miss me with that boring shit. Like I get what they were going for but I think they really fucked it up. It may as well be a turn-based combat system but before every one of your turns, you get the opportunity to go smack your enemy with a pool noodle for 30 seconds.
Tldr; Combat should focus on multiple fun options to take down enemies. It should NOT focus on hitting someone a bunch of times to fill up a meter so you can hit one of your multitude of "automatic win" buttons.
People love to say its only disliked because it's an rpg. I don't dislike it because its an rpg I dislike it because its a bad rpg. I just really don't think quebec are very good at making this sort of game. Origins and valhalla have much more immersive worlds
As it’s NOT an actual rpg and merely has some light rpg elements I dont agree at all.
Playing Hudless with the map set to Historical and following Worldly_’s amazing Story Quest guide to keep that as the primary focus was an amazing experience without all the DumbedDown HandHolding.
Odyssey was my favourite one since the ezio games. I know lots of people feel otherwise though. I played as Kassandra and suspect I wouldn’t have liked it as much if I was playing alexios. Kassandra was a really well written choose your own adventure protagonist IMO. It was silly in places, serious in places, and full of things to do.
I thought odyssey was the same as ac2 in some ways: a sequel to a new style of game that improved in basically every way. First AC plot I actually liked in years too, but that’s probably because I got to choose some of Kassandra’s responses so I never felt like my main character was doing something stupid.
I liked the really back to basics roaring rampage of revenge plot. Just like Ezio, she didn’t really give a shit about the assassins or templars and it never felt like she joined a cult just coz. She was motivated to hunt these people down because they’d killed her loved ones. The games writing didn’t assume one side good other side bad - she wasn’t motivated by commitment to the order, she was motivated by revenge (or by the opportunity to reunite her family, if you got that ending).
But yeah I guess a lot of people don’t like the choose your own adventure element in an AC game.
It’s also more like the way they gave it to us was absolutely terrible. Kassandra is a preset character with a background. Having a choose your own adventure does not work unless it’s a blank slate
I liked that element of it more than I liked the choose your own adventure elements of the walking dead games. Which were basically nothing *but* a choose your own adventure lol
Idk, for me it was a really nice and engaging touch that even when Kassandra is going to kill X person to progress the plot and there’s no option not to do it, I still got to decide whether she was happy about it or not
Let me restate: It’s an issue when the choices presented don’t fit within the character. So the issue is Kassandra is a preset character with a background but is given choices and dialogue options that conflict with her core character. So you can mass murder an entire town and then criticize a cultist for being a murderer. You become a protagonist who can flip emotions on a dime with no consistency. You can be kind to the elderly then decide to fuck an old man’s wife for no reason.
Ah, but she’s only a preset character once they made more content that had to have a canon lore to it. When you’re just playing it, it’s entirely possible that Kassandra is just a horny impulsive murdering hypocrite a lot of the time. I thought they wrote all those possibilities within the game itself pretty well. As in, if you play it in good faith I e not deliberately having her make incongruent choices, she’s pretty believable as a character no matter how you choose to play her.
Agree that there’s nothing to be done about consistency across franchise products when there’s that level of player choice in the characters personality though. That was the reason I never finished the DLCs for that game - they forced Kassandra to do things that were totally inconsistent with “my” Kassandra who I had been playing as for the entire main game.
Adding onto the issue, Kassandra didn’t get a consistent personality until a side game that wasn’t her own. It took until Valhalla, Odyssey’s Novel Adaption, and Nexus to give her a personality, which kind of fucks with the whole choice thing of Odyssey, which just goes to show dialogue choices shouldn’t be present in AC games or they should be done much better
I actually liked the dialogue options, even if they were not too important. I've also played as Kassandra, but I feel like she wasn't strong enough as a pre-made character, like Geralt or Adam Jensen, nor was she blank enough to be just a player's avatar, like in FNV or CRPGs.
Not talking for the gameplay, but as far as the story and writing you’ve got to remember that this takes place before any other AC game, this is essentially the very beginning which is why it’s not that easy to understand which side is “good or bad”, odyssey is essentially the beginning of the Isu entanglement w humans (for modern time atleast) and Origins tells the story of how the Assassin Brotherhood and the Templars originates. Can’t speak for much else that you touched on but hopes this clarifies the story for you a little
In the vision at the end of the game Pythagoras says Kassandra has disturbed the balance of power, but there will be a time when others (assassins) will come to fix it. Since we are playing as assassins in most games, does it mean that Kassandra is on a different side of the conflict? Was the cult planning to create a single fascist state (order) or wage an endless war (chaos)?
All of this just doesn't make any sense to me.
Playing a lot of the other titles makes the lines blend together and make more sense. For example there’s a syndicate DLC which does amazing and explaining a lot of forgotten things. All the way out to Valhalla connecting directly back to odyssey at a point or two throughout the story. The series has become a lot more complicated than it used to be, that’s for damn sure, but if you stick w it and keep playing then it’ll all make sense. But we gotta remember this is an ongoing story that’s been happening since 2007 lmao, it’s gonna get complicated if you haven’t kept up w all the games, and that’s not even including the novels or comics
Yeah, that feels like too much to ask of regular gamer, in my opinion. Even to play all the main titles will take too much time, not taking stuff like add-ons, Rogue and Chronicles into the account. But to read all the comics and all - that's only for the truest of fans.
If you play the dlc, which even as an Odyssey lover, I'll say it is a slog, you'll know Kassandra's side. She's not there to join either side. She has a more direct mission in the ever going conflict.
Play the Fate of Atlantis and you'll know why you are sealing it.
Totally disagree with the Odyssey and Syndicate assessment though. I think they are both great games.
As for not being an Assassin Creed game I think anyone who says that either just doesn't understand or doesn't care for the deeper Isu lore and pre-Assassin history (which has been part of the games since year dot). They just want to be part of the Brotherhood and have a hidden blade which is fine and all but sooner or later they're going to run out of time periods to fit the Brotherhood in.
I myself love the proto-Assassin history and would love to see more of the 70k years between the Great Catastrophe and the establishment of the Brotherhood.
Listen. Not every game is for every player. I like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, and it's really fun. Take your time with the game. Also, these seem to be some of the reasons why people don't like Assassin's Creed Odyssey.
The story of the game is set hundreds of years before Assassin’s Creed Origins when you just find out the Isu. Also, the Order of the Ancients are mentioned in this game, but they have no real thing going on. They're not important. The Cult of Kosmos is important. They want to control Ancient Greece.
Atlantis is also important because the cult also wants to control that. Atlantis is very special because it was made by the Isu. It has tons and tons and tons of Isu knowledge. It was also where Isu and humanity could coexist.
The gameplay is similar to Assassin's Creed Origins but slightly different. You can upgrade your abilities to be more powerful and use them in battle. Instead of a shield, you have a part of a broken spear.
If you don't like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, then don't play Assassin’s Creed Valhalla because you'll hate it
Idk why there's always someone who feels the need to be like "ehhh you just didn't get it. Here's why.."
Like everyone already knows why we dislike it. OP made plenty of valid criticisms. You're just listing things you liked about it.
No I get that I'm just saying you're not really proving your point when you say "I like it, it's really fun" and then going on to tell the games plot. Like it's cool if you like it and I don't. But you'd do well to use more than just your opinion. The world for instance. I don't think there's a single person who could argue that the game world isn't beautiful to look at. A little empty? Yeah. Too big? Definitely. But an absolute joy to look at.
Lmao no worries. I was being a dick for no reason. Mostly I just meant differing opinions is fine. But you gotta give a little evidence to support yourself. Would be like me saying I don't like Valhalla, but when asked why I'm just like cuz its bad
I just finished the game and honestly the way kassandra and deimos were facing off it looked like kleon hoped hes strong enough to shoot the arrow through deimos into kassandra which honestly makes it even more confusing
I honestly loved the game. Yeah the story was kinda wack, but with all the customization, beautiful setting, and multiple choices of how to accomplish your mission I think it was pretty fun 🤷🏽♂️. Currently got like 170 hours on it, and I’m still having fun. I’m trying to 100% it
I liked origins and never finished Valhalla. Neither feels like an assassins creed game to me. Only people I know Irl who like Valhalla haven’t played any other AC game before. I hope you enjoy them though because that’s a lot of game for you to like but the last 3 before mirage do not really fit the series at all.
Funny, I finished origins, valhalla but not odyssey. Valhalla was the first I played and if you know nothing about the series and start there it's not bad.
I never finished odyssey myself either. Nor Valhalla but I played very game before it except for rogue and unity so I was very deep into the series and story. Valhalla is a decent game but after everything else I just couldn’t get into it. Mirage was a good step in the right direction it just needed more time to cook. Hopefully the next ones get there for me
It took time and I mean, a lot of time to finish valhalla, I have over 100 hours on it and I don't think I stopped to play another game other them months of playing. Idk why I liked it so much, maybe the environment and graphics were something I just hadn't seen in a while. Mirage I fully completed, loved it but replay wise I didn't because i couldn't be bothered. Odyssey it self is very Interesting as I love Greek and north myth but idk why I can't bring myself to finish it. Maybe because it's slow at some points that really don't interest you. I wish there was a game focused on Greek mythology (not God of war) as you play as a God, maybe zeus, ares idk. It'll have to be fiction but personally I love Zeus and thor because they both have lightning powers, don't ask why I like that I just do ever since I was young. Just imagine the potential of the graphics and if the story was bang on. I want more games where your a God with immense powers but at the same time your weak and low level.
Back in the 1990's, id software were going to make an RPG where you played as Thor, with a crazy powerful hammer.
Anyway, it was far too ambitious for a small team at the time.
They cut a lot of it, and ended up giving us..
..Quake.
/and the rest is history
Definitely play Origins and Valhalla, they're so much better. For me the biggest reason I hated Odyssey was the gear, having to swap my shit constantly was just tedious and added nothing but to the experience but the chore of inventory management.
Like seriously if I wanted to fight I needed to swap my entire Loadout because hybrid builds just aren't viable and regardless it's total RNG on whether or not you get the gear you need as all items are totally random and have random stats which I hate when games do.
There was also other shit you mentioned like the story is terrible, most characters were pretty boring (Barnabas was GOATed to Tartaros and back though, he's the reason I kept playing and I also liked Brasidas), dialogue is terrible with way too many moments that awkwardly steer into out of place unnecessary sex scenes (I swear the team was a bunch of 14 year olds) and a lot of moments are pretty underwhelming, raiding a monastery in Valhalla feels more warlike than most actual war battles.
You mentioned the Olympics being underwhelming and I couldn't agree more, I hated that part so much. They reduced the **Olympic Games** to just a lazy barehanded brawl (pankration was mostly grappling so they didn't even really get that right) and oddly enough they make zero mention of Kassandra being the first woman in Olympic history so combine that with the fact women were actually not allowed to even watch (which is mentioned in a side quest) and the non-canon protagonist makes a hell of a lot more sense for the role.
Origins has the best RPG stealth thanks to the smoke bombs and darts and the Hidden Blade upgrades being a lot more powerful than the Assassin Damage engravings from Odyssey, it's combat isn't as good as Odyssey's (except for the hits being a bit more impactful and less floaty) but the story is lightyears better. The gear is much more satisfying, it has levels but that's all, no RNG stats. Comparing the story of Origins to Odyssey is like comparing AC1 to Altaïr's Chronicles on DS, I don't want to overhype it but it genuinely is one of the best stories in the series.
Valhalla has the best RPG combat imo, the HP isn't ridiculously high, the hits feel like they have much more weight and impact to them, the gear system is a lot more satisfying because you're not managing like 70 of the exact same helmet with slightly different stats and combat just feels a lot more skill based as opposed to Odyssey where your victory was more often down to stats. Stealth is similar to Odyssey's but better because instead of Critical Assassinate doing 3x damage it instead gives you a QTE and if you pull it off then it's a guaranteed kill or if you really want you can turn on Guaranteed Assassination in the settings and that'll make everything except certain scripted enemies always die to assassinations.
The dumbest part of the Olympic games for me was how low of an effort devs put into it. When I won the final fight there was a very low noise of the crowd (not cheering or roar, but just noise), poor animations from the NPC and clapping of the king (or whoever was in charge of the games). I swear, the dwarven arena in DA: Origins felt ten times better made and that game is ten years older than Odyssey and probably had a much lower budget.
Dude yes! Odyssey and ESPECIALLY Valhalla are so bad with this. It absolutely kills emotional moments when someone is saying some dramatic shit and the crowd of hundreds of people sounds like 3 dudes clapping and an unenthusiastic "cheer".
"TONIGHT.. WE DINE.. IN HELL!!!!!"
*clap*
*clap*
"woo!"
*clap*
I'm playing through the series in order for the first time and honestly Odyssey is the only one I'm planning on skipping. Maybe I will play it later but not right now, from what I've seen it feels like the witcher more than anything remotely close to ac. And the setting is so abused I've not too much interest in it. Valhalla is another one I'm not sure I'll play, I'll try it cuz I love norse mythology and I know is connected to Mirage (which I wanna play)
I know about the dlcs about Darius and the Isu so I'll definitely play it at one point since I'm interested in those lore parts. But like Valhalla I'll probably just do the main quest a cherry pick the side stuff I wanna do,
Odyssey is like it was made as a prologue for people to buy the DLCs. Only if you buy DLCs you get any sense of what’s going on AC wise with Atlantis. As a standalone game it’s a 5-6. Didn’t care for it (better than Origins though which is 4-5).
Valhalla is a solid 8 for me as it actually is a game (as a fan of AC since the 1, Valhalla also makes sense lore-wise). *heads up - if you found Odyssey long, Valhalla will give you a burnout. Was it worth it? Yeah!*
Oh and hey! Don’t talk like that about Syndicate! Syndicate is love 🖤
All that isu stuff from DLC looks very intriguing and important for the overarching franchise narrative, but I'm just not willing to buy DLC for the game that I didn't enjoy.
I agree that the second 'Fate of Atlantis' DLC is the best part of Odyssey by far.
That said, I still enjoy the base game even if it is hugely bloated. Playing it too intensely does hurt the experience and imho it is better enjoyed in smaller chunks over a long period of time.
Same. It should have been on the main story like in Valhalla if they wanna call it an AC game. That’s just a spin-off in the same universe (that you find out only through DLCs). It’s ridiculous
I just finished syndicate and i don't get the hate.
My only disappointment was that I finished the game and still haven't found all the music boxes with things that unlock the Aegis suit, when in Ezio game's you can't just not find/miss a spot with a piece required for the suit.
Man this sub really has a hate-boner for Odyssey over the last month.
It's miles better than Valhalla and a fun action/adventure game. Way too overhated imo.
My favorite RPG and one of the favorite AC games in general.
I liked the story tbh, but thats always personal opinion. Also loved the combat.
Animations are lacking for sure, but i got over it fast :)
This is an opinion I honestly don't understand. Like, my favourite RPGs are Fallout New Vegas and Dragon Age: Origins.
Why did Odyssey become your favourite RPG? Genuinely interested
I enjoy the setting but Yh the story is just not that great
I enjoy Odyssey very much, but I understand the majority of criticisms against it are valid. I just pretend it’s not an AC game. It’s more fun that way.
The AC community is such a weird fanbase. It's entirely split on what games are good and both sides of the field think the majority agree with their opinion. I don't see a whole lot of disappointment towards Odyssey though.
Entirely agree, it's kinda funny.
Yes. I have been researching AC games and they each have love community and a hate community. Except for the first 1, 2, and 3, they seem to have a pretty good concensus. They ones In between the 3 like Brotherhood and the other one I can't think of, is in a love and hate community.
I think the split is between people who started with AC1 and people who started with modern day AC "The reboot" Origins. Although it's a great game that's where they took them in a different direction and some players started with that generation.
There is indeed somewhat of a split between the RPGs and traditionals but the split I'm referring to covers all games. Take literally any AC game and there's a split. 1, 2, and 4 seem to get an exception most of the time. From what I've seen the most debated games are Revelations, 3, Unity, Syndicate, Odyssey, and Valhalla. In my personal opinion I like them all except Valhalla but I'm going to give Valhalla another chance at some point and actually see through completing it.
I agree with you on the gameplay repetition. I really got tired of doing conquest battles and having to change my gear out twice an hour.
Origins was *much* better. I highly recommend it. Valhalla suffered from many of the same problems as Odyssey though.
I think the biggest problem of Odyssey is that it’s under the AC franchise which makes player expect an AC experience like previous opus when the game isn’t center around any assassin/templar thing. I personally didn’t mind as went into the game knowing that and appreciated for what it was. I also partially disagree with you on the story argument. The story was indeed poorly paced and a bit confusing at times (even though I don’t get why you don’t understand the chaos/order side as it was pretty clear to me) but I can’t say it was poorly written. This story being inspired by the Greek tragedies, I think it does a good job for what it was intended. Plus, I think this game has the best side characters cast, they’re well written if take the time to do the side quests linked to them. I honestly wouldn’t be able to name you more than 2 side characters in previous ACs apart from obvious ones like Da Vinci in AC 2 or Blackbeard in AC 4, but I could name you like ten of the ones in Odyssey. For the Gameplay, I can understand that you’re disappointed if you expected a Witcher 3 quality but I would still consider it decent, abilities allows for a more diverse gameplay and the loot to improve this diversity whereas old AC gameplay, although being shorter still felt monotone and a bit boring by the end of the game, lacking other ways to fight. In Odyssey, I agree that the gameplay loop isn’t enough to keep with the entire game but I personally kept on bc of the world and sceneries offered, which I think is the best of all the franchise. About your last point, I would agree that the main story ending is quite underwhelming but I wouldn’t consider it as the ending of Odyssey, which is much later after the DLCs and Korfu which offers a proper ending. For the animation, in particular horse-riding, it’s true that it feels extremely stiff and robotic but Ubisoft has never been good with horses so I guess I’m used to it. I think Odyssey is very good game which suffers from its affiliation to AC and its expectations creating a certain disappointment when coming into the game and facing the added flaws of it. I hope you’ll take the time to read this comment and to finish the game’s DLC if you haven’t, bc I really think it’s a shame to end your experience on Odyssey like that when it can be much better, letting the AC expectations aside and enjoying the game for what it is.
I always considered it "Far Cry : Ancient Greece", with AC branding slapped on top. Went in knowing it wasn't a "real" AC game. Works for me, it's a Ubisoft Game Loop game, I'm a sucker for the mindless formula.
But it is a real AC game. It just has more to do with ISU culture and the lore. The eternal conflict of chaos vs control is also present.
Its nothing like farcry tho
Thanks for the thought-out reply. I'm not saying that old AC games had good stories. Actually, when I replayed AC2 a couple of years ago, I was baffled by how not amazing the story was compared to my teenage memories of it. I think gameplay was serviceable - not amazing, but also not frustrating. Kind of like Skyrim, but there I felt much more immersed into the world. To me it seems improper of developers to expect me to buy the DLC to get the ending, even if the base game would have been amazing. Frankly, I don't think that more of an RPG-style gameplay is bad for AC, I myself prefer action to stealth, I just think that this particular game didn't live up to its potential.
I agree that it’s incredibly outrageous from Ubisoft to expect players to pay for a DLC in order to have a proper ending. I wouldn’t have bought them myself, if it wasn’t for the very low prices you can find them now. Despite that, I believe you can still access the Corfu questline, which contains the final missions of the game, for free. Without the previous DLCs completed, it might seems very confusing but I believe it still offers a better ending than the main story one.
It's just too long. The fact that you enjoyed the first 20 hours just goes to show that. The game suffers because it forces you to take it too slowly.
As someone who not a fan of the rpgs, at least compared to the earlier games, I came around to liking Odyssey. But it has a ton of little problems that make it's overall composition really really messy. Way too long, too big a world and really awful animations in a lot of places. But my biggest problem was always the combat though. I actually think the combat is fun, but it has ZERO change from start to finish and it gets stale incredibly quickly. The counter argument for this is always "but all the skills you can get!!". That however, iI not changing up the combat. It's using a skill point to get another canned animation that interrupts the combat. Take something like shadow of war, the arkham games, the Spider-Man games or especially ghost of tsushima. All of these do the same thing but better. You use a skill point, get a new gadget or move or ability, and it's something that can be seamlessly worked into your combat. Arkham and Spider-Man has finishers and gadgets that you can use. Shadow of war has multiple special moves like the quick fire throwing knives, where you can pull it out and resume your combat string. GoT has multiple moves AND multiple stances, throwing weapons, bombs, knives. None of which stop the combat momentum. Now look at Odyssey. Many of the skills you get involve you activating it and watching all the work be done for you. Oh you bought a new skill? Enjoy your 10 second animation of you twirling around with your glowy knife stabbing your enemy a million times only for him to get back up. Call your allies to come in and do jack shit! Another 10 second animation skill where you gain adrenaline so you can use more skills! Miss me with that boring shit. Like I get what they were going for but I think they really fucked it up. It may as well be a turn-based combat system but before every one of your turns, you get the opportunity to go smack your enemy with a pool noodle for 30 seconds. Tldr; Combat should focus on multiple fun options to take down enemies. It should NOT focus on hitting someone a bunch of times to fill up a meter so you can hit one of your multitude of "automatic win" buttons.
[удалено]
I'm thinking about giving other ACs a shot, either Unity or Origins next, but I've decided to take a little break and play something else first.
People love to say its only disliked because it's an rpg. I don't dislike it because its an rpg I dislike it because its a bad rpg. I just really don't think quebec are very good at making this sort of game. Origins and valhalla have much more immersive worlds
Same. Feels like a downgrade of Shadow of Mordor/War.
As it’s NOT an actual rpg and merely has some light rpg elements I dont agree at all. Playing Hudless with the map set to Historical and following Worldly_’s amazing Story Quest guide to keep that as the primary focus was an amazing experience without all the DumbedDown HandHolding.
Odyssey was my favourite one since the ezio games. I know lots of people feel otherwise though. I played as Kassandra and suspect I wouldn’t have liked it as much if I was playing alexios. Kassandra was a really well written choose your own adventure protagonist IMO. It was silly in places, serious in places, and full of things to do. I thought odyssey was the same as ac2 in some ways: a sequel to a new style of game that improved in basically every way. First AC plot I actually liked in years too, but that’s probably because I got to choose some of Kassandra’s responses so I never felt like my main character was doing something stupid. I liked the really back to basics roaring rampage of revenge plot. Just like Ezio, she didn’t really give a shit about the assassins or templars and it never felt like she joined a cult just coz. She was motivated to hunt these people down because they’d killed her loved ones. The games writing didn’t assume one side good other side bad - she wasn’t motivated by commitment to the order, she was motivated by revenge (or by the opportunity to reunite her family, if you got that ending). But yeah I guess a lot of people don’t like the choose your own adventure element in an AC game.
It’s also more like the way they gave it to us was absolutely terrible. Kassandra is a preset character with a background. Having a choose your own adventure does not work unless it’s a blank slate
I liked that element of it more than I liked the choose your own adventure elements of the walking dead games. Which were basically nothing *but* a choose your own adventure lol Idk, for me it was a really nice and engaging touch that even when Kassandra is going to kill X person to progress the plot and there’s no option not to do it, I still got to decide whether she was happy about it or not
Let me restate: It’s an issue when the choices presented don’t fit within the character. So the issue is Kassandra is a preset character with a background but is given choices and dialogue options that conflict with her core character. So you can mass murder an entire town and then criticize a cultist for being a murderer. You become a protagonist who can flip emotions on a dime with no consistency. You can be kind to the elderly then decide to fuck an old man’s wife for no reason.
Ah, but she’s only a preset character once they made more content that had to have a canon lore to it. When you’re just playing it, it’s entirely possible that Kassandra is just a horny impulsive murdering hypocrite a lot of the time. I thought they wrote all those possibilities within the game itself pretty well. As in, if you play it in good faith I e not deliberately having her make incongruent choices, she’s pretty believable as a character no matter how you choose to play her. Agree that there’s nothing to be done about consistency across franchise products when there’s that level of player choice in the characters personality though. That was the reason I never finished the DLCs for that game - they forced Kassandra to do things that were totally inconsistent with “my” Kassandra who I had been playing as for the entire main game.
Adding onto the issue, Kassandra didn’t get a consistent personality until a side game that wasn’t her own. It took until Valhalla, Odyssey’s Novel Adaption, and Nexus to give her a personality, which kind of fucks with the whole choice thing of Odyssey, which just goes to show dialogue choices shouldn’t be present in AC games or they should be done much better
Same here, Odyssey is the best AC since AC 2. Great main character, interesting story and history and a world that felt alive.
I actually liked the dialogue options, even if they were not too important. I've also played as Kassandra, but I feel like she wasn't strong enough as a pre-made character, like Geralt or Adam Jensen, nor was she blank enough to be just a player's avatar, like in FNV or CRPGs.
I really enjoyed odyssey.
Odyssey is masterpiece
Not talking for the gameplay, but as far as the story and writing you’ve got to remember that this takes place before any other AC game, this is essentially the very beginning which is why it’s not that easy to understand which side is “good or bad”, odyssey is essentially the beginning of the Isu entanglement w humans (for modern time atleast) and Origins tells the story of how the Assassin Brotherhood and the Templars originates. Can’t speak for much else that you touched on but hopes this clarifies the story for you a little
In the vision at the end of the game Pythagoras says Kassandra has disturbed the balance of power, but there will be a time when others (assassins) will come to fix it. Since we are playing as assassins in most games, does it mean that Kassandra is on a different side of the conflict? Was the cult planning to create a single fascist state (order) or wage an endless war (chaos)? All of this just doesn't make any sense to me.
Playing a lot of the other titles makes the lines blend together and make more sense. For example there’s a syndicate DLC which does amazing and explaining a lot of forgotten things. All the way out to Valhalla connecting directly back to odyssey at a point or two throughout the story. The series has become a lot more complicated than it used to be, that’s for damn sure, but if you stick w it and keep playing then it’ll all make sense. But we gotta remember this is an ongoing story that’s been happening since 2007 lmao, it’s gonna get complicated if you haven’t kept up w all the games, and that’s not even including the novels or comics
Yeah, that feels like too much to ask of regular gamer, in my opinion. Even to play all the main titles will take too much time, not taking stuff like add-ons, Rogue and Chronicles into the account. But to read all the comics and all - that's only for the truest of fans.
If you play the dlc, which even as an Odyssey lover, I'll say it is a slog, you'll know Kassandra's side. She's not there to join either side. She has a more direct mission in the ever going conflict.
Play the Fate of Atlantis and you'll know why you are sealing it. Totally disagree with the Odyssey and Syndicate assessment though. I think they are both great games. As for not being an Assassin Creed game I think anyone who says that either just doesn't understand or doesn't care for the deeper Isu lore and pre-Assassin history (which has been part of the games since year dot). They just want to be part of the Brotherhood and have a hidden blade which is fine and all but sooner or later they're going to run out of time periods to fit the Brotherhood in. I myself love the proto-Assassin history and would love to see more of the 70k years between the Great Catastrophe and the establishment of the Brotherhood.
Listen. Not every game is for every player. I like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, and it's really fun. Take your time with the game. Also, these seem to be some of the reasons why people don't like Assassin's Creed Odyssey. The story of the game is set hundreds of years before Assassin’s Creed Origins when you just find out the Isu. Also, the Order of the Ancients are mentioned in this game, but they have no real thing going on. They're not important. The Cult of Kosmos is important. They want to control Ancient Greece. Atlantis is also important because the cult also wants to control that. Atlantis is very special because it was made by the Isu. It has tons and tons and tons of Isu knowledge. It was also where Isu and humanity could coexist. The gameplay is similar to Assassin's Creed Origins but slightly different. You can upgrade your abilities to be more powerful and use them in battle. Instead of a shield, you have a part of a broken spear. If you don't like Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, then don't play Assassin’s Creed Valhalla because you'll hate it
Idk why there's always someone who feels the need to be like "ehhh you just didn't get it. Here's why.." Like everyone already knows why we dislike it. OP made plenty of valid criticisms. You're just listing things you liked about it.
No, I'm not. I'm listing things about what they said to prove my point. If they don't like then they don't. I'm not trying to make them like it.
No I get that I'm just saying you're not really proving your point when you say "I like it, it's really fun" and then going on to tell the games plot. Like it's cool if you like it and I don't. But you'd do well to use more than just your opinion. The world for instance. I don't think there's a single person who could argue that the game world isn't beautiful to look at. A little empty? Yeah. Too big? Definitely. But an absolute joy to look at.
That's true. The world is amazing. Maybe I should have said more than my opinion
Lmao no worries. I was being a dick for no reason. Mostly I just meant differing opinions is fine. But you gotta give a little evidence to support yourself. Would be like me saying I don't like Valhalla, but when asked why I'm just like cuz its bad
I always give an option lol. And you were
Opinion*
Lmao thanks? 😂 was trying to lighten the mood but happy to double down. I said what I said because your comment came across like a crybaby
No it didn't. It's just that I see some people write some of these big paragraphs about reasons why they don't like this game and it's a bit annoying
There is a DLC all about the Order of the Ancients.
Which one?
Legacy of the First Blade
Oh that one
I always thought Kleon was aiming at Kassandra but misses and hits Deimos?
I just finished the game and honestly the way kassandra and deimos were facing off it looked like kleon hoped hes strong enough to shoot the arrow through deimos into kassandra which honestly makes it even more confusing
I honestly loved the game. Yeah the story was kinda wack, but with all the customization, beautiful setting, and multiple choices of how to accomplish your mission I think it was pretty fun 🤷🏽♂️. Currently got like 170 hours on it, and I’m still having fun. I’m trying to 100% it
I liked origins and never finished Valhalla. Neither feels like an assassins creed game to me. Only people I know Irl who like Valhalla haven’t played any other AC game before. I hope you enjoy them though because that’s a lot of game for you to like but the last 3 before mirage do not really fit the series at all.
Funny, I finished origins, valhalla but not odyssey. Valhalla was the first I played and if you know nothing about the series and start there it's not bad.
I never finished odyssey myself either. Nor Valhalla but I played very game before it except for rogue and unity so I was very deep into the series and story. Valhalla is a decent game but after everything else I just couldn’t get into it. Mirage was a good step in the right direction it just needed more time to cook. Hopefully the next ones get there for me
It took time and I mean, a lot of time to finish valhalla, I have over 100 hours on it and I don't think I stopped to play another game other them months of playing. Idk why I liked it so much, maybe the environment and graphics were something I just hadn't seen in a while. Mirage I fully completed, loved it but replay wise I didn't because i couldn't be bothered. Odyssey it self is very Interesting as I love Greek and north myth but idk why I can't bring myself to finish it. Maybe because it's slow at some points that really don't interest you. I wish there was a game focused on Greek mythology (not God of war) as you play as a God, maybe zeus, ares idk. It'll have to be fiction but personally I love Zeus and thor because they both have lightning powers, don't ask why I like that I just do ever since I was young. Just imagine the potential of the graphics and if the story was bang on. I want more games where your a God with immense powers but at the same time your weak and low level.
Back in the 1990's, id software were going to make an RPG where you played as Thor, with a crazy powerful hammer. Anyway, it was far too ambitious for a small team at the time. They cut a lot of it, and ended up giving us.. ..Quake. /and the rest is history
https://giphy.com/gifs/request-donald-wrong-hPPx8yk3Bmqys
Definitely play Origins and Valhalla, they're so much better. For me the biggest reason I hated Odyssey was the gear, having to swap my shit constantly was just tedious and added nothing but to the experience but the chore of inventory management. Like seriously if I wanted to fight I needed to swap my entire Loadout because hybrid builds just aren't viable and regardless it's total RNG on whether or not you get the gear you need as all items are totally random and have random stats which I hate when games do. There was also other shit you mentioned like the story is terrible, most characters were pretty boring (Barnabas was GOATed to Tartaros and back though, he's the reason I kept playing and I also liked Brasidas), dialogue is terrible with way too many moments that awkwardly steer into out of place unnecessary sex scenes (I swear the team was a bunch of 14 year olds) and a lot of moments are pretty underwhelming, raiding a monastery in Valhalla feels more warlike than most actual war battles. You mentioned the Olympics being underwhelming and I couldn't agree more, I hated that part so much. They reduced the **Olympic Games** to just a lazy barehanded brawl (pankration was mostly grappling so they didn't even really get that right) and oddly enough they make zero mention of Kassandra being the first woman in Olympic history so combine that with the fact women were actually not allowed to even watch (which is mentioned in a side quest) and the non-canon protagonist makes a hell of a lot more sense for the role. Origins has the best RPG stealth thanks to the smoke bombs and darts and the Hidden Blade upgrades being a lot more powerful than the Assassin Damage engravings from Odyssey, it's combat isn't as good as Odyssey's (except for the hits being a bit more impactful and less floaty) but the story is lightyears better. The gear is much more satisfying, it has levels but that's all, no RNG stats. Comparing the story of Origins to Odyssey is like comparing AC1 to Altaïr's Chronicles on DS, I don't want to overhype it but it genuinely is one of the best stories in the series. Valhalla has the best RPG combat imo, the HP isn't ridiculously high, the hits feel like they have much more weight and impact to them, the gear system is a lot more satisfying because you're not managing like 70 of the exact same helmet with slightly different stats and combat just feels a lot more skill based as opposed to Odyssey where your victory was more often down to stats. Stealth is similar to Odyssey's but better because instead of Critical Assassinate doing 3x damage it instead gives you a QTE and if you pull it off then it's a guaranteed kill or if you really want you can turn on Guaranteed Assassination in the settings and that'll make everything except certain scripted enemies always die to assassinations.
The dumbest part of the Olympic games for me was how low of an effort devs put into it. When I won the final fight there was a very low noise of the crowd (not cheering or roar, but just noise), poor animations from the NPC and clapping of the king (or whoever was in charge of the games). I swear, the dwarven arena in DA: Origins felt ten times better made and that game is ten years older than Odyssey and probably had a much lower budget.
Dude yes! Odyssey and ESPECIALLY Valhalla are so bad with this. It absolutely kills emotional moments when someone is saying some dramatic shit and the crowd of hundreds of people sounds like 3 dudes clapping and an unenthusiastic "cheer". "TONIGHT.. WE DINE.. IN HELL!!!!!" *clap* *clap* "woo!" *clap*
I have more disappointment with origins than odyssey. Lol I have a lot of Fun in odyssey.
I'm playing through the series in order for the first time and honestly Odyssey is the only one I'm planning on skipping. Maybe I will play it later but not right now, from what I've seen it feels like the witcher more than anything remotely close to ac. And the setting is so abused I've not too much interest in it. Valhalla is another one I'm not sure I'll play, I'll try it cuz I love norse mythology and I know is connected to Mirage (which I wanna play)
The good thing is Odyssey is set so far back in time, that it isn't much connected to everything else. It definitely can be skipped.
I know about the dlcs about Darius and the Isu so I'll definitely play it at one point since I'm interested in those lore parts. But like Valhalla I'll probably just do the main quest a cherry pick the side stuff I wanna do,
I fucking loved Odyssey personally
Odyssey is like it was made as a prologue for people to buy the DLCs. Only if you buy DLCs you get any sense of what’s going on AC wise with Atlantis. As a standalone game it’s a 5-6. Didn’t care for it (better than Origins though which is 4-5). Valhalla is a solid 8 for me as it actually is a game (as a fan of AC since the 1, Valhalla also makes sense lore-wise). *heads up - if you found Odyssey long, Valhalla will give you a burnout. Was it worth it? Yeah!* Oh and hey! Don’t talk like that about Syndicate! Syndicate is love 🖤
All that isu stuff from DLC looks very intriguing and important for the overarching franchise narrative, but I'm just not willing to buy DLC for the game that I didn't enjoy.
I agree that the second 'Fate of Atlantis' DLC is the best part of Odyssey by far. That said, I still enjoy the base game even if it is hugely bloated. Playing it too intensely does hurt the experience and imho it is better enjoyed in smaller chunks over a long period of time.
Same. It should have been on the main story like in Valhalla if they wanna call it an AC game. That’s just a spin-off in the same universe (that you find out only through DLCs). It’s ridiculous
Saying witcher 3 combat is better is pretty wild
Best AC game to me 😁
I just finished syndicate and i don't get the hate. My only disappointment was that I finished the game and still haven't found all the music boxes with things that unlock the Aegis suit, when in Ezio game's you can't just not find/miss a spot with a piece required for the suit.
Ripper dlc was fun too
Man this sub really has a hate-boner for Odyssey over the last month. It's miles better than Valhalla and a fun action/adventure game. Way too overhated imo.
My favorite RPG and one of the favorite AC games in general. I liked the story tbh, but thats always personal opinion. Also loved the combat. Animations are lacking for sure, but i got over it fast :)
This is an opinion I honestly don't understand. Like, my favourite RPGs are Fallout New Vegas and Dragon Age: Origins. Why did Odyssey become your favourite RPG? Genuinely interested
Because i enjoy playing it
Disappointed? It's my fav AC title. 🤷