Does the flow of Origins feel different from previous ACs?
I like Syndicate a lot but I got to admit, the city centric formula gets abit old. Doesn't quite hook me like Black Flag or Rogue's does.
I would say it's more like Black Flag in structure, but with more stuff to do in the ports if that makes sense? Clusters of quests, but things you run into on the "sea" that divert you off the path. There's a bit more variety in locale as well, it's not all cities like Alexandria or deserts either, some parts are pretty lush and others are very barren craggy mountain areas.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
Yeah, I'm sure they'll villain 'em up. It probably won't be like the Rikers in The Division.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Doesn't make it feel any different to me tbh. You're already playing an assassin. You already kill people based on vigilantism and literally everyone that gets in between you and your target. You murder countless guards and hired mercenaries along the way. I'm not sure how these guys are suddenly different than anyone else you are killing in these games to make this icky but the rest of the games perfectly fine.
+6
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
They're saying what the player motivation would be to go after them, not the character motivation.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
They're saying what the player motivation would be to go after them, not the character motivation.
That’s interesting... I get what you mean, but my personal motivation, as a player, is to experience the narrative within the context of the narrative. Which in an assassin’s creed game is largely driven by the character’s motivations. I’m not really interested in hunting down Uber loot unless it has a narrative justification. And I think it shouldn’t even be an aspect of the game unless it is justified in the narrative. It’s one reason the Hippodrome feels so weird and out of place in Origins. Bayek doesn’t seem to care much about it so I didn’t care about it either. It serves no narrative purpose. Not even an ancillary one.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
They're saying what the player motivation would be to go after them, not the character motivation.
That’s interesting... I get what you mean, but my personal motivation, as a player, is to experience the narrative within the context of the narrative. Which in an assassin’s creed game is largely driven by the character’s motivations. I’m not really interested in hunting down Uber loot unless it has a narrative justification. And I think it shouldn’t even be an aspect of the game unless it is justified in the narrative. It’s one reason the Hippodrome feels so weird and out of place in Origins. Bayek doesn’t seem to care much about it so I didn’t care about it either. It serves no narrative purpose. Not even an ancillary one.
Your motivation != everyone else's motivation.
These motivations have already existed in the other games for various players.
The only reason I killed Phylakes in Origins was for the phat loot.
This is no different, if you want to play based on your motivations you still can. You get to decide if you do these or not. It's optional content. If you think your character wouldn't do it then don't do it. Very simple!
Would it help your "character motivation" if you found out that each of these guys was in league to murder 1000's of your people? Would it help if you knew each and every single backstory? Is it really so difficult to read beyond the base narrative to see that maybe these guys are worth killing for other reasons that your character doesn't understand? Have you never played a JRPG what required grinding, where is your backlash on on the outright murder of innocent turtles in Mario?
I'm just saying, your stance is odd on character vs player motivation for murder.....it's more like rage for rage sake...
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
I really hope it's not just because I want to like my character. And if the end it turns out he's just an asshole Templar I'll be really disappointed.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
They're saying what the player motivation would be to go after them, not the character motivation.
That’s interesting... I get what you mean, but my personal motivation, as a player, is to experience the narrative within the context of the narrative. Which in an assassin’s creed game is largely driven by the character’s motivations. I’m not really interested in hunting down Uber loot unless it has a narrative justification. And I think it shouldn’t even be an aspect of the game unless it is justified in the narrative. It’s one reason the Hippodrome feels so weird and out of place in Origins. Bayek doesn’t seem to care much about it so I didn’t care about it either. It serves no narrative purpose. Not even an ancillary one.
Your motivation != everyone else's motivation.
These motivations have already existed in the other games for various players.
The only reason I killed Phylakes in Origins was for the phat loot.
This is no different, if you want to play based on your motivations you still can. You get to decide if you do these or not. It's optional content. If you think your character wouldn't do it then don't do it. Very simple!
True.
I find it hard not to think about the game in the old way - leading up to full synchronization. Like the Ezio trilogy has a lot of “optional content” as presented to the player but, in actuality, all of that optional content is canonical. Because for Desmond to reach full synchronization with Ezio or Connor, he had to complete all of those optional objectives. You as a player didn’t have to, but if you wanted the full canonical experience you did have to.
Admittedly, the animus is different now and the objective isn’t to fully synchronize with the ancestor.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
Ha okay thanks. I’ve been keeping myself away from spoilers.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
SnicketysnickThe Greatest Hype Man inWesterosRegistered Userregular
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
I really hope it's not just because I want to like my character. And if the end it turns out he's just an asshole Templar I'll be really disappointed.
See I really liked Rogue for showing the Assassins as assholes themselves, so if Kassandra goes down a similar route I'll be on board
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
I really hope it's not just because I want to like my character. And if the end it turns out he's just an asshole Templar I'll be really disappointed.
It could be your character starting the Templars with good intentions, and then over the centuries it's become the warped organization it is today. It's a similar situation with the Order, actually.
Unity wasn't good for much, but I did like how they showed that not every Templar is a bastard, and not every Assassin is a "good" guy.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
Wait really?
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
I really hope it's not just because I want to like my character. And if the end it turns out he's just an asshole Templar I'll be really disappointed.
See I really liked Rogue for showing the Assassins as assholes themselves, so if Kassandra goes down a similar route I'll be on board
Yeah I personally feel that Rogue is their best game, narratively. It would make sense that a game that takes place ~400 years before Origins would show the beginnings of the Order. I would actually really be happy about that.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I don’t know how I feel about hunting humans for randomized loot attributes. It works in Shadows of Mordor because you are doing it to orcs. And it’s total fantasy. This is fantastical history. And you’re an assassin. But it seems a bit bizarre to put in a system where you can hunt other humans, evil or not, for progressive loot. I mean, you’re assassinating them for powered up pauldrons. Seems like that might not fall within the assassin’s creed even if “everything is permitted.”
It’s kind of icky.
I’m trying to think of other games like this and I don’t feel like there are many? The Division was and it was pretty icky there, too. Plus that’s an MMO which is a bit different from a solo narrative experience.
Not really if the ingame context is that they're templars or otherwise terrible persons designated as targets.
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
They're saying what the player motivation would be to go after them, not the character motivation.
That’s interesting... I get what you mean, but my personal motivation, as a player, is to experience the narrative within the context of the narrative. Which in an assassin’s creed game is largely driven by the character’s motivations. I’m not really interested in hunting down Uber loot unless it has a narrative justification. And I think it shouldn’t even be an aspect of the game unless it is justified in the narrative. It’s one reason the Hippodrome feels so weird and out of place in Origins. Bayek doesn’t seem to care much about it so I didn’t care about it either. It serves no narrative purpose. Not even an ancillary one.
Your motivation != everyone else's motivation.
These motivations have already existed in the other games for various players.
The only reason I killed Phylakes in Origins was for the phat loot.
This is no different, if you want to play based on your motivations you still can. You get to decide if you do these or not. It's optional content. If you think your character wouldn't do it then don't do it. Very simple!
True.
I find it hard not to think about the game in the old way - leading up to full synchronization. Like the Ezio trilogy has a lot of “optional content” as presented to the player but, in actuality, all of that optional content is canonical. Because for Desmond to reach full synchronization with Ezio or Connor, he had to complete all of those optional objectives. You as a player didn’t have to, but if you wanted the full canonical experience you did have to.
Admittedly, the animus is different now and the objective isn’t to fully synchronize with the ancestor.
Yea everyone interacts with these things very differently.
I wouldn't be surprised if for a majority of players the narrative reasons for anything are completely unimportant. Lots and lots of people care more about checking boxes, getting loot and seeing trophies in games and the story narrative stuff is just a little side bonus.
For me personally on these particular games I pretend the modern day story doesn't even exist. There is no animus. I skip through all that stuff and just play like I am the character in the past and that's the entirety of it. But my character loves getting new weapons so hell yea I'll fight some dude who wants to do battle with me with a reward on the line. Why not?
I think the morality regarding killing guards in this series, outside the ones that are actively cruel and seem to "deserve it", has always just been something like, "Well, next life pick maybe pick better employers." Which is to say the guards themselves may be innocent, but the assassins have never had too hard a time taking them out when templars use them as fodder for their world domination schemes. Templar hire thugs to enforce their schemes, and use their innocence as a shield as if to say, "you wouldn't stab a man with glasses would you?" to which the Assassin's reply: "absolutely."
Although in many cases, the guards themselves are depicted as part of an arrogant and corrupt system that oppresses the populace, right from the first game.
Like, is there any reason why I couldn't hack in a skateboard? Who wouldn't want to skateboard around in ancient Rome?
Seriously though they should do some kind of offshoot called Animus Tales or something and go off the rails like the Saints Row series did. I mean, both the mechanical and narrative framework are there to substantiate it.
Personally it always amuses me the assassins logic behind killing random guards, especially the ones guarding like treasure. I just make up the reasons in my head, like oh these guy s stole the treasure from the local people etc.
It does amuse me trying to Imagine an assassin explaining why he had to kill a kids father to the kid. No you see the Templars and precursor civilisations and the creed. And that's why you don't have a daddy
i mean, I'm making excuses a bit here. There's plenty of reason to suspect the Assassin's moral reasoning as some degree of rationalization for an enthusiasm for stabbing dudes.
"I have this one hammer, so I assume everything i hit with it was a nail that totally had it coming."
I assume that most of the deaths aren't canon and it's my poor memory synchronising that requires all that death
It's the same reason that there are so many guards - they're all the same guy, that the Animus knows didn't die at that point so resets the assets, only for me to kill him again
There are a few online comics that hit exactly this point: you kill dozens of guys getting to your target and then a cut scene where the main character has a crisis of conscience over killing the target. The dissonance... it is large.
I don't think too hard about it, because the designers, traditionally, haven't thought to hard about it.
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
edited July 2018
Mary Anne Disraeli is my new favorite AC NPC. She is a gift.
Desmond The Corgi!
Overall, been enjoying my time with Syndicate a lot, quick turn around from Unity's blandness. This one is oozing charm in comparison.
I had no idea there were WW1 missions with a whole nother assassin but it was a huge pleasant surprise for me since I find the setting far more interesting than Victorian Londan. Shame it wasn't more in depth, I hate being teased like that but was still nice to see.
What I really want to see is an Assassin's Creed that takes place across three different eras in the same setting with three different assassins, probably not going to ever happen but could be pretty interesting.
I assume that most of the deaths aren't canon and it's my poor memory synchronising that requires all that death
It's the same reason that there are so many guards - they're all the same guy, that the Animus knows didn't die at that point so resets the assets, only for me to kill him again
That's also my explanation, in Origin, for the many hundreds of civilians killed by runaway chariots and/or by the soldiers that I kill who then disperse into toxic clouds.
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
Jack The Ripper DLC any good?
Kind of about to ready to move on to Origins but the story seems like it could be pretty interesting and more Evie.
SnicketysnickThe Greatest Hype Man inWesterosRegistered Userregular
I liked it, the extra mechanic I wasn't too fussed by but I liked more Evie and she gets a really good outfit in it as well, which is always a plus. (I wish I could get the one from
WW1
in the main game, but alas no, even though it's the best looking one in the game imo)
I assume that most of the deaths aren't canon and it's my poor memory synchronising that requires all that death
It's the same reason that there are so many guards - they're all the same guy, that the Animus knows didn't die at that point so resets the assets, only for me to kill him again
And everyone tastes like chicken.
Wait
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
Well, saw Origins on sale and decided to pull the trigger.
Woah at that first fight. We're not in Arkham anymore it seems.
Some new info on various side activities in AC Odyssey. Like the sound of all of it, but I'm particularly interested in the War stuff and the Naval stuff.
If for some reason you've never liked the ship stuff in AC, you don't have to dive too deep into it in Odyssey if you dont want. You ship levels up with you, so you don't have to worry about upgrades and stuff for tougher fights. But you can also delve into extra options to make it better. You can also recruit lieutenants that provide different boosts and abilities for your ship. You can have 4 active lieutenants, but there are tons to collect, like Pokemon.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
+1
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
My biggest recent excitement:
They showed armor sets with actual pants!
My one issue with all the armor designs so far is the bare legs style. Which I know they are doing the whole Sparta thing but there is exactly 0 scenarios where I find that aesthetically pleasing. So I'm super happy to see there will be options I'll enjoy too.
0
Dr. ChaosPost nuclear nuisanceRegistered Userregular
My one issue with all the armor designs so far is the bare legs style. Which I know they are doing the whole Sparta thing but there is exactly 0 scenarios where I find that aesthetically pleasing. So I'm super happy to see there will be options I'll enjoy too.
Oh man, the mercenaries in Odyssey that will hunt you down if you gain notoriety by acting like a douche are described as Orgins phylakes meets Shadow of Mordor's Nemesis system. Nice! Every game is populated by 50 mercs of various difficulty. There's some handcrafted mercenaries, and the rest are randomly generated. You'll never completely clear the map of them, since a new one will take the place of the one you killed.
If you have one you don't feel like fighting, you can pay off the bounty on your head or you can track down the person who put the bounty on you and kill them. This wipes out the contract for your life.
Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
Posts
I would say it's more like Black Flag in structure, but with more stuff to do in the ports if that makes sense? Clusters of quests, but things you run into on the "sea" that divert you off the path. There's a bit more variety in locale as well, it's not all cities like Alexandria or deserts either, some parts are pretty lush and others are very barren craggy mountain areas.
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
Don't think the idea will be that you're literally just there to rob them.
This is a clickable link to my Steam Profile.
I don’t know who wrote the post DemonStacey is quoting or what they were interpreting, but taking it at face value:
“The mercenary system is much deeper then the Phylakes system - as each mercenary has strengths and weaknesses listed (sorta like Shadow of Mordor) and you can hunt them for their listed unique equipement.”
That seems icky to me.
Hopefully it is different. Maybe these are Templar artifact weapons you are hunting down. But if it is a system like Shadow of Mordor, it seems weird to me. Based on the way that system is described in that post, I find icky.
Doesn't make it feel any different to me tbh. You're already playing an assassin. You already kill people based on vigilantism and literally everyone that gets in between you and your target. You murder countless guards and hired mercenaries along the way. I'm not sure how these guys are suddenly different than anyone else you are killing in these games to make this icky but the rest of the games perfectly fine.
Well good news! You aren't an Assassin, because this takes place like 4 centuries before Origins and Bayek founded the Order.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
That’s interesting... I get what you mean, but my personal motivation, as a player, is to experience the narrative within the context of the narrative. Which in an assassin’s creed game is largely driven by the character’s motivations. I’m not really interested in hunting down Uber loot unless it has a narrative justification. And I think it shouldn’t even be an aspect of the game unless it is justified in the narrative. It’s one reason the Hippodrome feels so weird and out of place in Origins. Bayek doesn’t seem to care much about it so I didn’t care about it either. It serves no narrative purpose. Not even an ancillary one.
Wait really?
Same deal, you hunted them for their loot
Your motivation != everyone else's motivation.
These motivations have already existed in the other games for various players.
The only reason I killed Phylakes in Origins was for the phat loot.
This is no different, if you want to play based on your motivations you still can. You get to decide if you do these or not. It's optional content. If you think your character wouldn't do it then don't do it. Very simple!
I'm just saying, your stance is odd on character vs player motivation for murder.....it's more like rage for rage sake...
Yes, it takes place in 431 BCE, vs 48 BCE for Origins
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
I'm still crossing my fingers that Odyssey is actually Templar:Origins
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
I really hope it's not just because I want to like my character. And if the end it turns out he's just an asshole Templar I'll be really disappointed.
True.
I find it hard not to think about the game in the old way - leading up to full synchronization. Like the Ezio trilogy has a lot of “optional content” as presented to the player but, in actuality, all of that optional content is canonical. Because for Desmond to reach full synchronization with Ezio or Connor, he had to complete all of those optional objectives. You as a player didn’t have to, but if you wanted the full canonical experience you did have to.
Admittedly, the animus is different now and the objective isn’t to fully synchronize with the ancestor.
Ha okay thanks. I’ve been keeping myself away from spoilers.
See I really liked Rogue for showing the Assassins as assholes themselves, so if Kassandra goes down a similar route I'll be on board
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
It could be your character starting the Templars with good intentions, and then over the centuries it's become the warped organization it is today. It's a similar situation with the Order, actually.
Unity wasn't good for much, but I did like how they showed that not every Templar is a bastard, and not every Assassin is a "good" guy.
Yeah I personally feel that Rogue is their best game, narratively. It would make sense that a game that takes place ~400 years before Origins would show the beginnings of the Order. I would actually really be happy about that.
Yea everyone interacts with these things very differently.
I wouldn't be surprised if for a majority of players the narrative reasons for anything are completely unimportant. Lots and lots of people care more about checking boxes, getting loot and seeing trophies in games and the story narrative stuff is just a little side bonus.
For me personally on these particular games I pretend the modern day story doesn't even exist. There is no animus. I skip through all that stuff and just play like I am the character in the past and that's the entirety of it. But my character loves getting new weapons so hell yea I'll fight some dude who wants to do battle with me with a reward on the line. Why not?
Would love to see one though.
Although in many cases, the guards themselves are depicted as part of an arrogant and corrupt system that oppresses the populace, right from the first game.
Like, is there any reason why I couldn't hack in a skateboard? Who wouldn't want to skateboard around in ancient Rome?
Seriously though they should do some kind of offshoot called Animus Tales or something and go off the rails like the Saints Row series did. I mean, both the mechanical and narrative framework are there to substantiate it.
It does amuse me trying to Imagine an assassin explaining why he had to kill a kids father to the kid. No you see the Templars and precursor civilisations and the creed. And that's why you don't have a daddy
"I have this one hammer, so I assume everything i hit with it was a nail that totally had it coming."
It's the same reason that there are so many guards - they're all the same guy, that the Animus knows didn't die at that point so resets the assets, only for me to kill him again
I don't think too hard about it, because the designers, traditionally, haven't thought to hard about it.
Desmond The Corgi!
Overall, been enjoying my time with Syndicate a lot, quick turn around from Unity's blandness. This one is oozing charm in comparison.
What I really want to see is an Assassin's Creed that takes place across three different eras in the same setting with three different assassins, probably not going to ever happen but could be pretty interesting.
That's also my explanation, in Origin, for the many hundreds of civilians killed by runaway chariots and/or by the soldiers that I kill who then disperse into toxic clouds.
Kind of about to ready to move on to Origins but the story seems like it could be pretty interesting and more Evie.
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
And everyone tastes like chicken.
Wait
Woah at that first fight. We're not in Arkham anymore it seems.
If for some reason you've never liked the ship stuff in AC, you don't have to dive too deep into it in Odyssey if you dont want. You ship levels up with you, so you don't have to worry about upgrades and stuff for tougher fights. But you can also delve into extra options to make it better. You can also recruit lieutenants that provide different boosts and abilities for your ship. You can have 4 active lieutenants, but there are tons to collect, like Pokemon.
They showed armor sets with actual pants!
My one issue with all the armor designs so far is the bare legs style. Which I know they are doing the whole Sparta thing but there is exactly 0 scenarios where I find that aesthetically pleasing. So I'm super happy to see there will be options I'll enjoy too.
If you have one you don't feel like fighting, you can pay off the bounty on your head or you can track down the person who put the bounty on you and kill them. This wipes out the contract for your life.