Wait, they're actually dropping NFTs? Fantastic, I may be able to take them off my boycott list in time for the new Mario + Rabbids game.
(I'm serious, I actually responded to a questionnaire saying that I'd bought the deluxe/collectors editions of every AC up to now, and was refusing to give them any more money while they dicked around with that shit)
Wait, they're actually dropping NFTs? Fantastic, I may be able to take them off my boycott list in time for the new Mario + Rabbids game.
(I'm serious, I actually responded to a questionnaire saying that I'd bought the deluxe/collectors editions of every AC up to now, and was refusing to give them any more money while they dicked around with that shit)
A worker from the A Better Ubisoft initiative has told TheGamer that some developers at Ubisoft Quebec have asked not to work on Assassin’s Creed Project Red because of creative director Jonathan Dumont. Dumont was accused of harassment in 2020, allegedly verbally abusing and making sexual advances toward his colleagues, particularly women and new starters.
The worker, who asked to remain anonymous, tells us that Dumont has been responsible for many developers leaving Ubisoft altogether, due to his alleged outbursts “creating a climate of fear.”
In 2020 no less. Like at this point it just has to be the serial, unreformable abusers who are LITERALLY terrible people and not someone who just hasn't been "learned right." How anyone in this climate sticks to the "old habits" of office abuse is beyond me.
As for the AC changes; I couldn't give a shit about INIFINITY and doubt I'd use it, unless there is some interconnectivity between the worlds going forward (e.g., progress in Red somehow transfers to Hexe for some reason). As for which titles I'm looking forward to. . .honestly it is Hexe. Everyone and their mother is jonesing for Red and I would be too if it were focused on a small area (like something of Tokyo's size and complexity as it was originally laid out with the palace in the center of a city intricately designed to induce "directional insanity" to stop invaders from making a beeline for the royal family). If it's just going to be GOT in AC, I'll still play it, but witches and the gameplay the comes with that sounds way more interesting.
So I’m finally playing through Viking Quest and I don’t understand - is Varin’s Helm not something you can go back and loot after scaring off Sulke or whatever his name is?
Well, I finally got into Valhalla. I'm liking it more than I thought I would. I'm through like the beginning area/part (chapters 1-3, I guess?). Anyway, it's pretty cool.
I'm in the camp that really likes Valhalla. It's a bit of a polarizing game. Some folks don't think it feels very AC-y. Some folks don't like the way enemies scale, meaning series staples like leaping assassinations might not always kill a target because your gear versus their health makes it a non-lethal blow. There are some valid criticisms of the game. But I find (this is strictly my own opinion) that if you take Valhalla for what it is and don't project any expectations on it for what other games in the series are, it's a very fulfilling game in its own right. No, it isn't exactly like the games that came before. It's its own beast. And I think that's ok.
Anyway, glad you're enjoying Valhalla. There is a wealth of content in this game and it is a lot of fun to play.
Valhalla was enjoyable enough but it’s the third game in a row with the same basic mechanics and structure, and for me it’s just getting stale, it’s like 300+ hours of the same basic mechanics at this stage, minimum, not including dlc. The missions especially, with the npc dialogue trees and stuff, have started to feel perfunctory too. combat and stealth, while working and being generally fun, is also just feeling way too familiar
It’s starting to feel like the games were giant expansions rather than anything new
I’m excited for a change up with mirage, but also kind of annoyed it’s on last gen too, as I selfishly really want a next gen only game
My biggest problem is that I don't like any of the characters in Valhalla. Everyone, even Eivor sucks. He/she is affable but they're still an asshole invader with asshole friends.
I found Origins to be tedious enough to just mainline the experience, but I still liked the setting and characters. I enjoyed Odyssey's settings and characters even more, so I played much more of that. Valhalla I'll be happy enough to finish the story.
Valhalla is basically a (somewhat) historically accurate viking simulator. It isn't really an AC game. Sure, it pretends to be, but it isn't really an AC game. It has strayed too far from what defines an AC game. It's mostly just a combat RPG. I enjoy Valhalla. I think it's a fun game.
But I also really like stealth games. And Valhalla isn't really a stealth game. You can stealth. But you don't have to. And in fact the way combat is balanced, you are rewarded to not stealth. It has tons of special combat abilities, finishers, and all that, which really push you towards becoming a viking warrior, and not an assassin. And I know that I personally enjoy the game a lot more when I just dive straight into combat and play the role of a viking.
So while I really do like Valhalla a lot for what it is and the space it exists in, I am very eager to see the series go back to its stealth roots.
+1
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I'm in the camp that really likes Valhalla. It's a bit of a polarizing game. Some folks don't think it feels very AC-y. Some folks don't like the way enemies scale, meaning series staples like leaping assassinations might not always kill a target because your gear versus their health makes it a non-lethal blow. There are some valid criticisms of the game. But I find (this is strictly my own opinion) that if you take Valhalla for what it is and don't project any expectations on it for what other games in the series are, it's a very fulfilling game in its own right. No, it isn't exactly like the games that came before. It's its own beast. And I think that's ok.
Anyway, glad you're enjoying Valhalla. There is a wealth of content in this game and it is a lot of fun to play.
See i didn't want a classic AC style game I was just excited for a Viking action-RPG. My biggest issue was it dropped the ball on progression HARD.
I didn't hate the game or anything. I just wanted a bit more. And the ending was honestly the worst and most baffling ending I have ever experienced in a video game.
I could have forgiven a lot more if they just had more meaningful progression.
I don't think we have received the "true ending" yet? Isn't that part of this Final Chapter that they are going to be patching in at some point before year's end?
Honestly, the bigger sin is the fact that they did not communicate to their playerbase that the out-of-box story was incomplete and it would take up to two+ years of patches and story roll outs to finally see the end of Eivor's story. That's the truly baffling part.
+1
Options
DemonStaceyTTODewback's DaughterIn love with the TaySwayRegistered Userregular
I don't think we have received the "true ending" yet? Isn't that part of this Final Chapter that they are going to be patching in at some point before year's end?
Honestly, the bigger sin is the fact that they did not communicate to their playerbase that the out-of-box story was incomplete and it would take up to two+ years of patches and story roll outs to finally see the end of Eivor's story. That's the truly baffling part.
Yea.. hell if they could have at least made the "ending" feel less like you are legit just waiting for the next mission it would have hurt less. But it was truly bizarre.
It was a 3/5 game that really should have been a 4/5 but some bizarre fumbles got in the way.
Valhalla is basically a (somewhat) historically accurate viking simulator. It isn't really an AC game. Sure, it pretends to be, but it isn't really an AC game. It has strayed too far from what defines an AC game. It's mostly just a combat RPG. I enjoy Valhalla. I think it's a fun game.
But I also really like stealth games. And Valhalla isn't really a stealth game. You can stealth. But you don't have to. And in fact the way combat is balanced, you are rewarded to not stealth. It has tons of special combat abilities, finishers, and all that, which really push you towards becoming a viking warrior, and not an assassin. And I know that I personally enjoy the game a lot more when I just dive straight into combat and play the role of a viking.
So while I really do like Valhalla a lot for what it is and the space it exists in, I am very eager to see the series go back to its stealth roots.
I'm in the camp that really likes Valhalla. It's a bit of a polarizing game. Some folks don't think it feels very AC-y. Some folks don't like the way enemies scale, meaning series staples like leaping assassinations might not always kill a target because your gear versus their health makes it a non-lethal blow. There are some valid criticisms of the game. But I find (this is strictly my own opinion) that if you take Valhalla for what it is and don't project any expectations on it for what other games in the series are, it's a very fulfilling game in its own right. No, it isn't exactly like the games that came before. It's its own beast. And I think that's ok.
Anyway, glad you're enjoying Valhalla. There is a wealth of content in this game and it is a lot of fun to play.
See i didn't want a classic AC style game I was just excited for a Viking action-RPG. My biggest issue was it dropped the ball on progression HARD.
I didn't hate the game or anything. I just wanted a bit more. And the ending was honestly the worst and most baffling ending I have ever experienced in a video game.
I could have forgiven a lot more if they just had more meaningful progression.
Actually my favorite Assassin's Creed game up until the last half hour.
If the horseshit that happens at the end of vanilla Valhalla isn't the "ending" ending then that's even worse because it means they decided to ruin their story before even getting to tell all of it.
I know Eivor's story anyway, they said what Eivor's story is. Eivor's story
doesn't fucking matter, it's Basim's story haha surprise the antagonist wins. Eivor doesn't have a story- she doesn't have any agency, she only exists to get her history looted by an immortal pile of garbage.
This is the conceit of every Assassin's Creed game due to the metanarrative they have anchored themselves to, of course. It just didn't matter until Valhalla, because it was always historical information gathering. Like reading a three hundred year old diary, where it's only not a gross personal violation because of the time span and lack of personal connection.
The second the story is about a personal antagonist running around in the memories of the person they opposed in their actual real life, where they go to the grave of this person they knew and interacted with and say this shit?
It's a nice place to die, Eivor. Not everyone gets to choose. You bested me. I don't know how, but you did. Yet i'm the one left standing. And now I can take from you anything I want... your memories, your skills, your secrets. They're all mine.
Hey. You're telling a gross-ass story. That's it. It's gross.
I'm getting really angry. It keeps crashing to desktop, no error. Drivers are all updated, Windows 11 is fully updated, all files verified. WTF. It's getting to be unplayable. I'm not even on a mission right now, just looting small lootable chests (the tiny gold map markers) in the world.
I'm getting really angry. It keeps crashing to desktop, no error. Drivers are all updated, Windows 11 is fully updated, all files verified. WTF. It's getting to be unplayable. I'm not even on a mission right now, just looting small lootable chests (the tiny gold map markers) in the world.
Try lowering your graphic settings. I've had the game crash when looking at certain places in the terrain (usually mountainous). I had one particular save that had a few hours of progress that would crash on load. I finally got it to load by dropping graphics quality a lot. I have no idea which particular setting was the culprit. I just dropped down from max to low and that was enough to let me survive loading.
After I got out of the mountains, I ramped quality back up with no adverse affect. But I've had a half dozen or so crashes that resulted from panning over the terrain.
I'm getting really angry. It keeps crashing to desktop, no error. Drivers are all updated, Windows 11 is fully updated, all files verified. WTF. It's getting to be unplayable. I'm not even on a mission right now, just looting small lootable chests (the tiny gold map markers) in the world.
Try lowering your graphic settings. I've had the game crash when looking at certain places in the terrain (usually mountainous). I had one particular save that had a few hours of progress that would crash on load. I finally got it to load by dropping graphics quality a lot. I have no idea which particular setting was the culprit. I just dropped down from max to low and that was enough to let me survive loading.
After I got out of the mountains, I ramped quality back up with no adverse affect. But I've had a half dozen or so crashes that resulted from panning over the terrain.
Sorry I never replied. I don't know if this had anything to do with it, honestly, but it's actually (ironically) the opposite that seemed to make the game more stable. I checked my settings and it wasn't at max. I set the game to max and I only had one or two crashes since, as opposed to the constantly crashing, nearly unplayable state it was in before.
I wonder if it had something to do with me trying to get the game working on Steam Deck. I DID get it working, but maybe something with my settings/configuration on the Deck had a negative impact on the settings on my PC? I dunno.
The game seemed fairly crash-y whenever I tried to fight a zealot way below the recommended level.
Huh. I went looking for this thread because I started playing Valhalla a week ago. I've now been in England for a couple of days, and yesterday I started getting the crashes to desktop. It seems to happen when raiding/pillaging, but perhaps that's just what most of my mini-quests seem to consist of at the moment. I guess I'll try both approaches: lowering the settings or raising them to max (though I think they're already there). If it persists, I'm outta here: I used to be an Assassin's Creed fan, but especially with Odyssey I realised that the open world RPG format isn't for me. (I liked Origins a lot but lost interest with the DLCs, and Odyssey already felt too much like a chore.) I want to give Valhalla a proper chance, but not if it resists me to such an extent.
For the record, I'm playing on Win 10; my PC's a 9900K, my graphics card is a Geforce 3080. When the game runs, it runs smoothly, though with occasional half-second freezes.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
I don’t think Valhalla was bad, what I played of it. But I think it was too much. It also felt kind of soulless - at least the characters did. I couldn’t really empathize with them very well. The game just felt out of my interest after awhile and there were too many crashes and whatnot.
Just a footnote, but one thing I definitely dislike with the last three Assassin's Creed games is that they've reduced the Assassins/Templars rivalry to the most boring of "here are the good guys, here are the bad guys" setups. I thought it was much more narratively interesting when you had conflicted characters, grey areas, but now all Templars and proto-Templars have to be hateful and horrible and Assassins can murder all of them without a second thought because after all they're evil. It wasn't like that in the earlier games, at least up to Unity, where it often felt like the two groups were much more similar than they cared to admit, definitely in their methods but sometimes also in their goals.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
When the games got longer than 40 hours to 100%, they became arduous. All of this based on my personal time played: Unity was boring and arduous - 86 hours, I believe, to 100%. Syndicate was really great but still arduous - 77 hours minus the Jack the Ripper DLC. Origins - 99 hours. Odyssey - 120+ hours to not even 100%. Valhalla - who the fuck knows. Way too fucking long, all these games. I hope Mirage is closer to 40 hours in length. Probably not, though.
I'm glad the franchise is going back to its roots—I didn't mind the RPG elements at first, but Ubisoft used them as a crutch to prop up weak gameplay, exactly like the ever-increasing size of the game world.
That said, Mirage looks...stilted? Traversal doesn't look as smooth as Unity, which is almost a decade old. I checked out a combat video earlier today and seemed to cycle through the same three animations over and over. I'm going to keep an open mind, but the previews left me cold.
0
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
So jumping back into Valhalla. It's been a while so I forgot a lot about it.
Ye gods it's still a pretty game. Also I really like how heavy they made you feel, which goes back to Origins. Odyssey had this weightlessness to the movement and combat that didn't feel right to me.
Also I like how the bow and melee combat is tied together, using the bow to stagger enemies in combat before finishing them makes it feel useful when the shit hits the fan.
+1
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
I will be honest, they actually got me to care about the modern stuff with Layla Hassan.
and then threw all that in the trash, apparently
+1
Options
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
I did some quests and running round and I was just utterly bored.
I've now completed two of the England story arcs and I'm enjoying the game more than expected. I don't think it'll necessarily last, but there've been enough interesting and engaging characters, and I'm enjoying the atmosphere of the open world quite a bit. Especially Ledecestre was pretty cool, with the 9th century (i.e. for us already historical) settlement overlapping the older layer from Roman times.
I do wish that the Assassin's Creed combat of these last few games felt more solid and weighty. Somehow it never feels to me like Eivor and the other characters are actually interacting physically; it's more like everyone's waving around their weapons and if they intersect with someone that character takes damage. Honestly, I don't know how much of this is gameplay and how much is animations and sound effects, but I find myself wishing for something more From Software lite.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
When the games got longer than 40 hours to 100%, they became arduous. All of this based on my personal time played: Unity was boring and arduous - 86 hours, I believe, to 100%. Syndicate was really great but still arduous - 77 hours minus the Jack the Ripper DLC. Origins - 99 hours. Odyssey - 120+ hours to not even 100%. Valhalla - who the fuck knows. Way too fucking long, all these games. I hope Mirage is closer to 40 hours in length. Probably not, though.
story arc, and I can definitely say that I love Assassin's Creed's open-world wilderness much more than any of the rural/wilderness bits in Odyssey. There's something about this moment in history and those environments that really click for me. (Plus it's bringing back fuzzy memories of watching Robin of Sherwood as a kid.)
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
+1
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
It does look very nice:
But after Valhalla dragged on far too long, I'm not sure even a tribute to the original game in the series can tempt me back. Maybe I'll get a disc copy on heavy discount next year.
Posts
(I'm serious, I actually responded to a questionnaire saying that I'd bought the deluxe/collectors editions of every AC up to now, and was refusing to give them any more money while they dicked around with that shit)
Not so fast!
https://www.thegamer.com/report-assassins-creed-red-abuse-allegations-jonathan-dumont/
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
As for the AC changes; I couldn't give a shit about INIFINITY and doubt I'd use it, unless there is some interconnectivity between the worlds going forward (e.g., progress in Red somehow transfers to Hexe for some reason). As for which titles I'm looking forward to. . .honestly it is Hexe. Everyone and their mother is jonesing for Red and I would be too if it were focused on a small area (like something of Tokyo's size and complexity as it was originally laid out with the palace in the center of a city intricately designed to induce "directional insanity" to stop invaders from making a beeline for the royal family). If it's just going to be GOT in AC, I'll still play it, but witches and the gameplay the comes with that sounds way more interesting.
Anyway, glad you're enjoying Valhalla. There is a wealth of content in this game and it is a lot of fun to play.
It’s starting to feel like the games were giant expansions rather than anything new
I’m excited for a change up with mirage, but also kind of annoyed it’s on last gen too, as I selfishly really want a next gen only game
I found Origins to be tedious enough to just mainline the experience, but I still liked the setting and characters. I enjoyed Odyssey's settings and characters even more, so I played much more of that. Valhalla I'll be happy enough to finish the story.
But I also really like stealth games. And Valhalla isn't really a stealth game. You can stealth. But you don't have to. And in fact the way combat is balanced, you are rewarded to not stealth. It has tons of special combat abilities, finishers, and all that, which really push you towards becoming a viking warrior, and not an assassin. And I know that I personally enjoy the game a lot more when I just dive straight into combat and play the role of a viking.
So while I really do like Valhalla a lot for what it is and the space it exists in, I am very eager to see the series go back to its stealth roots.
See i didn't want a classic AC style game I was just excited for a Viking action-RPG. My biggest issue was it dropped the ball on progression HARD.
I didn't hate the game or anything. I just wanted a bit more. And the ending was honestly the worst and most baffling ending I have ever experienced in a video game.
I could have forgiven a lot more if they just had more meaningful progression.
Honestly, the bigger sin is the fact that they did not communicate to their playerbase that the out-of-box story was incomplete and it would take up to two+ years of patches and story roll outs to finally see the end of Eivor's story. That's the truly baffling part.
Yea.. hell if they could have at least made the "ending" feel less like you are legit just waiting for the next mission it would have hurt less. But it was truly bizarre.
It was a 3/5 game that really should have been a 4/5 but some bizarre fumbles got in the way.
It’s a decapitation simulator, mostly.
Actually my favorite Assassin's Creed game up until the last half hour.
If the horseshit that happens at the end of vanilla Valhalla isn't the "ending" ending then that's even worse because it means they decided to ruin their story before even getting to tell all of it.
I know Eivor's story anyway, they said what Eivor's story is. Eivor's story
This is the conceit of every Assassin's Creed game due to the metanarrative they have anchored themselves to, of course. It just didn't matter until Valhalla, because it was always historical information gathering. Like reading a three hundred year old diary, where it's only not a gross personal violation because of the time span and lack of personal connection.
The second the story is about a personal antagonist running around in the memories of the person they opposed in their actual real life, where they go to the grave of this person they knew and interacted with and say this shit?
Hey. You're telling a gross-ass story. That's it. It's gross.
Try lowering your graphic settings. I've had the game crash when looking at certain places in the terrain (usually mountainous). I had one particular save that had a few hours of progress that would crash on load. I finally got it to load by dropping graphics quality a lot. I have no idea which particular setting was the culprit. I just dropped down from max to low and that was enough to let me survive loading.
After I got out of the mountains, I ramped quality back up with no adverse affect. But I've had a half dozen or so crashes that resulted from panning over the terrain.
Sorry I never replied. I don't know if this had anything to do with it, honestly, but it's actually (ironically) the opposite that seemed to make the game more stable. I checked my settings and it wasn't at max. I set the game to max and I only had one or two crashes since, as opposed to the constantly crashing, nearly unplayable state it was in before.
I wonder if it had something to do with me trying to get the game working on Steam Deck. I DID get it working, but maybe something with my settings/configuration on the Deck had a negative impact on the settings on my PC? I dunno.
The game seemed fairly crash-y whenever I tried to fight a zealot way below the recommended level.
For the record, I'm playing on Win 10; my PC's a 9900K, my graphics card is a Geforce 3080. When the game runs, it runs smoothly, though with occasional half-second freezes.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
When the games got longer than 40 hours to 100%, they became arduous. All of this based on my personal time played: Unity was boring and arduous - 86 hours, I believe, to 100%. Syndicate was really great but still arduous - 77 hours minus the Jack the Ripper DLC. Origins - 99 hours. Odyssey - 120+ hours to not even 100%. Valhalla - who the fuck knows. Way too fucking long, all these games. I hope Mirage is closer to 40 hours in length. Probably not, though.
I never finished Valhalla but I'll probably get Mirage. Looks real good, and I'm really over the RPG mechanics they saddled the franchise with.
But enough about Odyssey...
That said, Mirage looks...stilted? Traversal doesn't look as smooth as Unity, which is almost a decade old. I checked out a combat video earlier today and seemed to cycle through the same three animations over and over. I'm going to keep an open mind, but the previews left me cold.
Ye gods it's still a pretty game. Also I really like how heavy they made you feel, which goes back to Origins. Odyssey had this weightlessness to the movement and combat that didn't feel right to me.
Also I like how the bow and melee combat is tied together, using the bow to stagger enemies in combat before finishing them makes it feel useful when the shit hits the fan.
Off it goes again.
I do wish that the Assassin's Creed combat of these last few games felt more solid and weighty. Somehow it never feels to me like Eivor and the other characters are actually interacting physically; it's more like everyone's waving around their weapons and if they intersect with someone that character takes damage. Honestly, I don't know how much of this is gameplay and how much is animations and sound effects, but I find myself wishing for something more From Software lite.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
They've said Mirage is about 20-25 hours.
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
But after Valhalla dragged on far too long, I'm not sure even a tribute to the original game in the series can tempt me back. Maybe I'll get a disc copy on heavy discount next year.