You think Origins is repetitive.. you’re simply not prepared for the utter repetition of Valhalla specifically. It’s the very definition of a “junk food video game.” It throws an insane amount of bloated content at you that provides very little sustenance. It’s really Ubisoft at their absolute worst imho. The only thing that kept me playing was the Norse Mythology elements. Other than that it’s just a soulless piece of crap.
@@DWTerminator I’m aware. I can already see Valhalla especially being an mto and not a full review.. cause the overwhelming majority of people who played it did not finish it just because of the repetitive bloat.
if you have the dlc you can boost your character to lvl 45 and all your tools are upgraded almost completely for free. And since enemies scale up, youll be able to do all story and side quests and forts and freely explore at your own leasure.
Getting a character boost skips nearly the entire progression system and defeats the entire point of it existing in the first place. Also enemies don't scale by default. You have to specifically enable that.
@@DWTerminator Well for me that was not the case to the scaling option. But I am not saying your wrong, I am simply saying that the argument that Ubisoft is trying to sell you pay to win add ons doesn't really work when you can essentially do the same thing by boosting. Furthermore, I personally don't think it necessarily takes away from the progression system, since there isn't really a progression system to begin with, just a numbers go higher system (of course the ability points are bypassed as a progression). Forts are just as fun at high levels than at low (for me) the only difference is, now I can go freely around the map and tackle forts at my leisure. But that is my opinion and just wanted to throw that out there, that there are ways around the leveling system if you desire.
I never said it was "pay to win." It's "pay to not waste your time as much as if you don't pay." You're just falling into the trap they laid with the booster. By including it as part of the DLC it doesn't *appear* like they're creating a problem and selling the solution, but you're still paying to skip the grind.
@@DWTerminator how am I falling for the trap? I never defended ubisoft's microtransactions, simply said that its bypassed entirely by the boost. Do you really think ubisoft is trying to appear as though they are not scamming people by adding a boost? That sounds paranoid dude. I find that Lariabs baldurs gate is far more tedious and "padded" by animations and dice rolls yet they dont have micros. So perhaps your making false correlation assumptions. What I hate about ubisoft is that they hold their games hostage to their servers, essentially the philosophy of "you will own nothing and pay a subscription and be happy". Very subjective thing your talking about when you say ubisoft intentionally designed ac origins around micros. Wheres your proof? I just want to say in edit that I dont put it past ubisoft to do that, I'm simply saying your rationale isnt convincing to me. Plenty of games pad content yet dont have micros. Highly subjective thing your saying here. I never felt that way playing the game and I have played through multiple times, but I also enjoy doing things in the game world and was not trying to b line the story.
The trap is thinking that a booster isn't a paid solution to a developer/publisher-created problem. Just because it's included as part of the CotP DLC doesn't mean you aren't paying extra for it, and as a bonus it's almost insulting people who played from the beginning and put up with the grind by just letting people who paid extra after the fact skip all of that. It's blatantly disrespecting the players' time and money and being complicit in that only makes the problem worse. You say it's "paranoid," but the simple fact of the matter is that they wouldn't be selling "time savers" if the game wasn't deliberately designed to push players toward said "time savers."
It definitely has performance drops (as do all the large settlements in the game), but it wasn't a massive outlier on my 5900x. It was pretty rough on the 4790k though.
Comprehensive review as always For me though, this was easily my favorite game of 2017 and might just be my favorite in the franchise. Level gating story progression definitely sucked but I was happy enough to do all the side missions in just about every area I was in. A little bit of bias helps that I have always been fascinated with ancient Egypt ever since I was a kid. So it was just a dream come true exploring this world for me For me it felt like if you mixed together The Witcher 3 with Metal gear solid 5. Sneaking around all of those different encampments and scouting overhead with the eagle give me a lot of vibes of sneaking around all the fortresses in Afghanistan and MGS. Otherwise the RPG set up all the way down to the map and the little boats that you push around on felt ripped directly from Witcher 3. I must have put a good 60 hours or so clearing the main story, and when I was done there were still areas of that map I hadn't even touched yet Each one that has followed I've liked less. Odyssey to me had way too much of a slow tedious start. I had to get to like level 15 or 20 before I started to like that game, and as much as I did indeed end up liking the rest of it, it's too big for its own good and no games should feel like it takes a dozen hours for it to "get good" Valhalla I barely played. I'll give it another shot at some point but I just don't find the setting very interesting. Playing out the Viking fantasy is cool but England is just basically one big grassy field with some small villages and wooded areas tossed in I have been enjoying Mirage but it's despite the game's best attempts to make me dislike it. There is some really poorly done voice work and animations, this long awkward unskippable portion of it every time you want to talk to a merchant In the controls are just atrocious at times. The button lay out makes no sense compared to prior titles, and the parkour and stealth can be super janky. Main character is constantly getting stuck on objects that I'm not trying to get on in the first place. But I like the setting in the atmosphere, and it's been fun for me to just kind of run around the city and collect stuff and cause trouble. It doesn't feel like a return to the roots, but it does feel like a tribute to it. Only recommend getting that one on sale for sure
I can't say I disagree with what's said in the review. I was someone who digged to world and setting enough to be willing to complete quite a lot of DLC content. The "RPG" mechanics really cripple the beautifal and vast open world, I found myself enoying thigns a bunch more after I basically had an OP caracter who can actually use stealth to sneak around. I remember ditching the hidden blade and using my fists to basically knock out guards toward the end, simply because I got tired of all the killing I had to do to level up. After struggling through Origins and Odyssey, if I ever get around to playing Valhalla, I'm definately going to find a 100% save and use New Game Plus to play through the missions. You really do have to grind your way to a fun gameplay loop in the Ancient Trilogy, and likely Shadow in the future.
I remember when Assassins Creed Origins came out a couple of years after Syndicate and thought it looked like a breath of fresh air. And it was, sometimes, and well, to be quite frank, Ubisoft did push this game a little too much by adding way too many missions to the point of becoming increasingly repetitive than fun, then making enemies damage sponge-y than previous titles, and finally, the inclusion of looting mechanics that are downright excessive, which affected future Assassin's Creed titles more negatively than positively in the long run.
Origins is my first and only Assassin's Creed game. I didn't know which parts were AC lore or new features. I thought the game was utterly amazing, except the main game was about 20% too long. I liked the mystical/alien elements because I wasn't expecting historical realism. The modern day stuff was jarring but it's super short. The most fun I had is the thing I always love doing in level based games: figuring out how to take down higher level opponents. The RPG elements seemed good to me. I found the side missions fun. There are some generic things but they were short. The Arena and Chariot races were cool. I only found the game tedious towards the end where it felt like the ending was due but it kept going. My only real complaint is the UI and associated handholding which was too intrusive. I prefer minimal UI. I particularly hate how you could turn a lot of the hud of, but if there was a secret door nearby a message would pop up reminding you to look for secret doors, which would totally give away that there was one. That "character says something to give you a hint" feature of modern games is my least favorite AAA feature. Overall, this was one of the best games I ever played. Mostly due to the setting. But I'm not some AC purists and I had no expectations. Also: I never even noticed the ingame shop.
When Origins first came out, I played it for 20 minutes and stopped because I couldn’t understand how to fight. I put it away for a year and then tried it again and I have to say that I really did enjoy the game. I cleared 100% of the main and DLCs maps. That was it. I won’t go back and do a new game. I did a similar thing for Odyssey as well. I couldn’t even stand to play Unity or syndicate. I made it through about 30 minutes of each. I finished the Valhalla main story and some of the DLCs. Don’t get me started on the woke agenda at the beginning of that one. Won’t play that again either. Uninstalled it. Shadows….hell no!! I just keep replaying all the original ones up to Rogue.
"they should have kept AC as stealth adventure , and made a new franchise as hacknslash adventure" they did ... have you seen "Immortals Fenyx Rising" ?
I have a copy of Immortals but haven't gotten around to it yet. It also came out 3 years after AC Origins and was pretty much competing with AC Valhalla for attention and sales. Obviously with its over $1 billion in sales, Valhalla won that one out and Ubisoft seems to have written off the idea of continuing Immortals as a series in favor of continuing to butcher AC. It's thoroughly frustrating.
At the very least it seems like an attempt to bring the series closer to its roots... but we'll see how it turned out whenever I get around to it. Certainly not any time soon.
while i enjoyed most of AC Origins. It just became a chore fatigue in Act III and drop of quality of quests in that Act. the grind and tediousness level goes way up as the series progresses starting Origins. when i completed Odyssey's required assassination targets in the main story. I swear I will never touch AC again. the lore become so convoluted. this franchise should've end in Revelation
The game is terrible as an assassins creed game and as an action game they should've just made ancient Egypt simulator because it works FAR better as that game, the problem lies with the planning project
"Hold L3 to interact" is just psychotic game design.
It's definitely pretty obnoxious. You kinda get used to it after a while but it's always annoying regardless.
You think Origins is repetitive.. you’re simply not prepared for the utter repetition of Valhalla specifically. It’s the very definition of a “junk food video game.” It throws an insane amount of bloated content at you that provides very little sustenance. It’s really Ubisoft at their absolute worst imho. The only thing that kept me playing was the Norse Mythology elements. Other than that it’s just a soulless piece of crap.
Like I said in the video, I'm dreading Odyssey and Valhalla precisely for that reason.
@@DWTerminator I’m aware. I can already see Valhalla especially being an mto and not a full review.. cause the overwhelming majority of people who played it did not finish it just because of the repetitive bloat.
We'll see how it goes. I'm definitely not optimistic about my chances of finishing it or especially covering the DLCs.
@@DWTerminator that’s the spirit
if you have the dlc you can boost your character to lvl 45 and all your tools are upgraded almost completely for free. And since enemies scale up, youll be able to do all story and side quests and forts and freely explore at your own leasure.
Getting a character boost skips nearly the entire progression system and defeats the entire point of it existing in the first place.
Also enemies don't scale by default. You have to specifically enable that.
@@DWTerminator Well for me that was not the case to the scaling option. But I am not saying your wrong, I am simply saying that the argument that Ubisoft is trying to sell you pay to win add ons doesn't really work when you can essentially do the same thing by boosting. Furthermore, I personally don't think it necessarily takes away from the progression system, since there isn't really a progression system to begin with, just a numbers go higher system (of course the ability points are bypassed as a progression). Forts are just as fun at high levels than at low (for me) the only difference is, now I can go freely around the map and tackle forts at my leisure. But that is my opinion and just wanted to throw that out there, that there are ways around the leveling system if you desire.
I never said it was "pay to win." It's "pay to not waste your time as much as if you don't pay."
You're just falling into the trap they laid with the booster. By including it as part of the DLC it doesn't *appear* like they're creating a problem and selling the solution, but you're still paying to skip the grind.
@@DWTerminator how am I falling for the trap? I never defended ubisoft's microtransactions, simply said that its bypassed entirely by the boost. Do you really think ubisoft is trying to appear as though they are not scamming people by adding a boost? That sounds paranoid dude. I find that Lariabs baldurs gate is far more tedious and "padded" by animations and dice rolls yet they dont have micros. So perhaps your making false correlation assumptions. What I hate about ubisoft is that they hold their games hostage to their servers, essentially the philosophy of "you will own nothing and pay a subscription and be happy". Very subjective thing your talking about when you say ubisoft intentionally designed ac origins around micros. Wheres your proof?
I just want to say in edit that I dont put it past ubisoft to do that, I'm simply saying your rationale isnt convincing to me. Plenty of games pad content yet dont have micros. Highly subjective thing your saying here. I never felt that way playing the game and I have played through multiple times, but I also enjoy doing things in the game world and was not trying to b line the story.
The trap is thinking that a booster isn't a paid solution to a developer/publisher-created problem. Just because it's included as part of the CotP DLC doesn't mean you aren't paying extra for it, and as a bonus it's almost insulting people who played from the beginning and put up with the grind by just letting people who paid extra after the fact skip all of that. It's blatantly disrespecting the players' time and money and being complicit in that only makes the problem worse.
You say it's "paranoid," but the simple fact of the matter is that they wouldn't be selling "time savers" if the game wasn't deliberately designed to push players toward said "time savers."
I found Odyssey to be slightly better than Origins, but that's not saying much.
I can see it having more refinements to the mechanics but from everything I've heard about the leveling grind, I'm dreading it.
Alexandria area runs like shit even on 6/12 core/thread modern cpus. However its nearly not as bad as with the hardware people had in 2017.
It definitely has performance drops (as do all the large settlements in the game), but it wasn't a massive outlier on my 5900x. It was pretty rough on the 4790k though.
I enjoyed this game for its scenery. And the core game is oké. Normally I play fps games. But this is nice for some visual exploring after a long day.
Comprehensive review as always
For me though, this was easily my favorite game of 2017 and might just be my favorite in the franchise. Level gating story progression definitely sucked but I was happy enough to do all the side missions in just about every area I was in. A little bit of bias helps that I have always been fascinated with ancient Egypt ever since I was a kid. So it was just a dream come true exploring this world for me
For me it felt like if you mixed together The Witcher 3 with Metal gear solid 5. Sneaking around all of those different encampments and scouting overhead with the eagle give me a lot of vibes of sneaking around all the fortresses in Afghanistan and MGS. Otherwise the RPG set up all the way down to the map and the little boats that you push around on felt ripped directly from Witcher 3.
I must have put a good 60 hours or so clearing the main story, and when I was done there were still areas of that map I hadn't even touched yet
Each one that has followed I've liked less. Odyssey to me had way too much of a slow tedious start. I had to get to like level 15 or 20 before I started to like that game, and as much as I did indeed end up liking the rest of it, it's too big for its own good and no games should feel like it takes a dozen hours for it to "get good"
Valhalla I barely played. I'll give it another shot at some point but I just don't find the setting very interesting. Playing out the Viking fantasy is cool but England is just basically one big grassy field with some small villages and wooded areas tossed in
I have been enjoying Mirage but it's despite the game's best attempts to make me dislike it. There is some really poorly done voice work and animations, this long awkward unskippable portion of it every time you want to talk to a merchant
In the controls are just atrocious at times. The button lay out makes no sense compared to prior titles, and the parkour and stealth can be super janky. Main character is constantly getting stuck on objects that I'm not trying to get on in the first place.
But I like the setting in the atmosphere, and it's been fun for me to just kind of run around the city and collect stuff and cause trouble. It doesn't feel like a return to the roots, but it does feel like a tribute to it. Only recommend getting that one on sale for sure
I can't say I disagree with what's said in the review. I was someone who digged to world and setting enough to be willing to complete quite a lot of DLC content. The "RPG" mechanics really cripple the beautifal and vast open world, I found myself enoying thigns a bunch more after I basically had an OP caracter who can actually use stealth to sneak around. I remember ditching the hidden blade and using my fists to basically knock out guards toward the end, simply because I got tired of all the killing I had to do to level up.
After struggling through Origins and Odyssey, if I ever get around to playing Valhalla, I'm definately going to find a 100% save and use New Game Plus to play through the missions. You really do have to grind your way to a fun gameplay loop in the Ancient Trilogy, and likely Shadow in the future.
last time i was this early, the sumerians were still a thing...
I remember when Assassins Creed Origins came out a couple of years after Syndicate and thought it looked like a breath of fresh air. And it was, sometimes, and well, to be quite frank, Ubisoft did push this game a little too much by adding way too many missions to the point of becoming increasingly repetitive than fun, then making enemies damage sponge-y than previous titles, and finally, the inclusion of looting mechanics that are downright excessive, which affected future Assassin's Creed titles more negatively than positively in the long run.
Origins is my first and only Assassin's Creed game. I didn't know which parts were AC lore or new features. I thought the game was utterly amazing, except the main game was about 20% too long. I liked the mystical/alien elements because I wasn't expecting historical realism. The modern day stuff was jarring but it's super short.
The most fun I had is the thing I always love doing in level based games: figuring out how to take down higher level opponents. The RPG elements seemed good to me.
I found the side missions fun. There are some generic things but they were short. The Arena and Chariot races were cool. I only found the game tedious towards the end where it felt like the ending was due but it kept going.
My only real complaint is the UI and associated handholding which was too intrusive. I prefer minimal UI. I particularly hate how you could turn a lot of the hud of, but if there was a secret door nearby a message would pop up reminding you to look for secret doors, which would totally give away that there was one. That "character says something to give you a hint" feature of modern games is my least favorite AAA feature.
Overall, this was one of the best games I ever played. Mostly due to the setting. But I'm not some AC purists and I had no expectations.
Also: I never even noticed the ingame shop.
When Origins first came out, I played it for 20 minutes and stopped because I couldn’t understand how to fight. I put it away for a year and then tried it again and I have to say that I really did enjoy the game. I cleared 100% of the main and DLCs maps. That was it. I won’t go back and do a new game. I did a similar thing for Odyssey as well.
I couldn’t even stand to play Unity or syndicate. I made it through about 30 minutes of each.
I finished the Valhalla main story and some of the DLCs. Don’t get me started on the woke agenda at the beginning of that one. Won’t play that again either. Uninstalled it.
Shadows….hell no!!
I just keep replaying all the original ones up to Rogue.
"they should have kept AC as stealth adventure , and made a new franchise as hacknslash adventure"
they did ... have you seen "Immortals Fenyx Rising" ?
I have a copy of Immortals but haven't gotten around to it yet. It also came out 3 years after AC Origins and was pretty much competing with AC Valhalla for attention and sales. Obviously with its over $1 billion in sales, Valhalla won that one out and Ubisoft seems to have written off the idea of continuing Immortals as a series in favor of continuing to butcher AC.
It's thoroughly frustrating.
@@DWTerminator exactly
just have it in mind when you ask that AC question
also , it "had" a cash shop too ...
Mirage looks interesting.
At the very least it seems like an attempt to bring the series closer to its roots... but we'll see how it turned out whenever I get around to it. Certainly not any time soon.
@@DWTerminatorAnd no Modern times sections at all, that is a plus atleast.
1.01.47 So basically Assassin's creed was trying to be like Thief?
I'd compare it more to the Hitman games.
Setting was great but the changes to the fantastical looter shooter were too much. Keep Diablo out of my ninja games. 😅
while i enjoyed most of AC Origins. It just became a chore fatigue in Act III and drop of quality of quests in that Act.
the grind and tediousness level goes way up as the series progresses starting Origins.
when i completed Odyssey's required assassination targets in the main story. I swear I will never touch AC again.
the lore become so convoluted. this franchise should've end in Revelation
The game is terrible as an assassins creed game and as an action game they should've just made ancient Egypt simulator because it works FAR better as that game, the problem lies with the planning project