Assassin's Creed Odyssey Season Pass Contains Episodic Content and Surprises

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,054
Ubisoft has switched to an episodic format for DLC and free content in the upcoming Assassin's Creed Odyssey game. The DLC from the Season Pass will be released on a 6 week schedule and there will be free DLC in-between the paid content. Also there will be daily and weekly challenges to complete that give a special in-game currency to spend at a vendor that sells exotic gear. Finally as an extra reward for purchasing the Season Pass, Assassin's Creed III Remastered will be added to the library of Season Pass owners for free. The game releases onto the PC and consoles on October 5, 2018.

A LAND OF MYTHS AND LEGENDS

Discover a world rich with myths and legends. From ancient rituals to famed statues, come face to face with Greece's legendary figures and discover the true nature of mythological beasts like Medusa and the Minotaur.
 
pay more for the full game, limited time only, some restriction apply, any complaints will be deleted from official forums and accounts will be banned. How else can a studio release a game on a yearly cadence without having to complete it post-launch, we're sure you'll understand.

We're now glad to announce that paying multiple times for the full experience is at the core of our mission statement, as we will continue to deliver partial experiences that will leave you wanting more, or just enough, or at this point, whatever we tell you is acceptable to be honest.
 
That really doesn't sound much different than the last game.

The game itself isn't episodic, the DLC is. I think I am fine with that. AC Origins had DLC that was an expansion of the main story that was separated from the time line. Sounds like this will be similar only instead of being one large chunk you get 6 episodes, each 3 giving you a new side story arc. If that gives a larger story and piece of the game than just releasing 2 separate DLC packs that is fine.

They also had the events to kill various Egyptian gods in Origins, so it sounds like this time around they are adding in more events like that.

So in a way it almost sounds like they took what they started there in Origins and just expanded on it.

The only part about this that really confused me was why of all games they decided to remaster AC3 as that was hated by everyone. I knew somebody that worked on the game and even they apologized for it before it was released. Personally I didn't find the game to be that bad, but everyone else sure seemed to like to bitch about it.
 
The only part about this that really confused me was why of all games they decided to remaster AC3 as that was hated by everyone. I knew somebody that worked on the game and even they apologized for it before it was released. Personally I didn't find the game to be that bad, but everyone else sure seemed to like to bitch about it.

Same.

I think its because it wasn't ALL about the revolution like that made it out to be before the game came out, and Connor wasn't a good character for a main top tier assassin, he seemed like more of a side character to me, still liked the game though.

Just my 2 cents.
 
I've been hoping for AC1 & AC2 remasters for PC but it looks like they went with a lesser favorite. Odd choice, Ubisoft.
 
not sure but I think pirates took a long time to crack Origins and the DLC's are still not cracked to this day. so I guess this episodes thing will make it even harder and players who want to enjoy the whole game will have to buy it.
 
not sure but I think pirates took a long time to crack Origins and the DLC's are still not cracked to this day. so I guess this episodes thing will make it even harder and players who want to enjoy the whole game will have to buy it.

Well, if you are enjoying or want to enjoy the full game, you should buy it. IMHO with no demos around anymore, I am cool with getting a pirated copy to try the game but if you really are enjoying it, give the devs your support. Not to mention you'll be less likely to get some malware payload if you buy your games.
 
pay more for the full game, limited time only, some restriction apply, any complaints will be deleted from official forums and accounts will be banned. How else can a studio release a game on a yearly cadence without having to complete it post-launch, we're sure you'll understand.

What do you mean, pay more for the full game? Are you of the mindset that any post-release content should be released free and/or should have been shipped with the game? Seems like a silly stance to me. This was a controversy many, many years ago when DLC first became a thing and people figured out some games were shipping discs with the DLC on the disc, only to be unlocked once the content was paid for. That's bullshit, if the finished content exists when the game ships, it should be in the game for free. But content that is created after a game ships? It costs time and money to make that. Thus, having it ship with the game would have delayed the release day, and releasing it post launch means they spent more money developing the game post-launch, so why is it unfair to charge for that?

Also, Ubisoft has made it clear that they are done with the yearly AC releases. There wasn't a full-fledged AC game in 2016, and the reason were seeing Odyssey a year after Origins is just a matter of timing. They have already said there won't be an Assassins Creed game in 2019. As we've just found out, that's technically not true with the AC3 remaster, but that's not really what I'd consider a full fledged AC release.

At the end of the day, Origins was a fantastic game. It is my second favorite game in the series, bested only by Black Flag. Ubisoft has made some mistakes with this franchise but they genuinely seem to be learning from them. Odyssey looks absolutely fantastic, and I believe it's going to set a new benchmark for the series... one that they won't be able to uphold with annual releases. We'll see...

The only part about this that really confused me was why of all games they decided to remaster AC3 as that was hated by everyone. I knew somebody that worked on the game and even they apologized for it before it was released. Personally I didn't find the game to be that bad, but everyone else sure seemed to like to bitch about it.

I agree that AC3 is a confusing choice. I think it was one of the more polarizing releases of the series. Plenty of people liked it, but a lot hated it. I personally wasn't a fan, I just didn't care for the setting. I have to wonder if the AC3 remaster is part of a larger plan to reboot the Kenway saga. Black Flag is very highly regarded as one of the best games in the franchise, I think a remaster of that could sell very well. AC3 might be a more cost effective way to test the waters. Give it away in the season pass, hopefully delivering a quality product that hypes people up for more, and then come out with a Black Flag remake that would no doubt sell well. Maybe even turn that into a Keyway (or other pirate) spinoff? Gotta be something, because as a one-off, there are definitely better, more deserving games in the franchise.
 
What do you mean, pay more for the full game? Are you of the mindset that any post-release content should be released free and/or should have been shipped with the game? Seems like a silly stance to me. This was a controversy many, many years ago when DLC first became a thing and people figured out some games were shipping discs with the DLC on the disc, only to be unlocked once the content was paid for. That's bullshit, if the finished content exists when the game ships, it should be in the game for free. But content that is created after a game ships? It costs time and money to make that. Thus, having it ship with the game would have delayed the release day, and releasing it post launch means they spent more money developing the game post-launch, so why is it unfair to charge for that?

Studios can do, say, and charge whatever they want for anything they release. But if the studio is advertising DLC they want you to pay for before a game even comes out it's not too hard to connect the dots. You can be an apologist for these types of game and business practices but unfortunately it does not sway my opinion. I acknowledge your stance and there are cases where there is nothing wrong with paying for Quality DLC, but this does not strike me as one of them.
 
First of all I have not played any Assassins Creed game since I was out of gaming for almost 10 years. Now that I want to sporadically have some fun I can enjoy all the "Game of the Year Editons - All content included" for down the floor prices. I even got 3 AC games for free since last year.

Yesterday I got DOOM for $9.89. Lol maybe I am acting like a cheap ass but damn it is so cost effective to be way behind with games...

When Origins hits the $20 mark all content included I 'll get. Same with this one.
 
Studios can do, say, and charge whatever they want for anything they release. But if the studio is advertising DLC they want you to pay for before a game even comes out it's not too hard to connect the dots. You can be an apologist for these types of game and business practices but unfortunately it does not sway my opinion. I acknowledge your stance and there are cases where there is nothing wrong with paying for Quality DLC, but this does not strike me as one of them.

I understand why you would dislike seeing DLC advertised before the game is out, but the reality is that's where we are in games today. With season passes being the standard, and bundling that season pass into a deluxe edition being equally common, they do have to advertise what comes with that deluxe edition. It makes less sense (to me) to have a $100 deluxe edition but not tell you what you're actually getting for that much money.

Also, consider that the DLC has a release schedule into Spring 2019. That's six months post-release. That tells me that this content doesn't really exist right now, which circles back to my point that this content, had it been included in the original game, would have only have pushed the release date back. If Ubisoft came out and said all this content was releasing a month after the game, I'd be just as pissed as you about it, but that's not what's happening here. As things stand, this was a commercial for the deluxe version of the game, and that doesn't really bother me.
 
I understand why you would dislike seeing DLC advertised before the game is out, but the reality is that's where we are in games today. With season passes being the standard, and bundling that season pass into a deluxe edition being equally common, they do have to advertise what comes with that deluxe edition. It makes less sense (to me) to have a $100 deluxe edition but not tell you what you're actually getting for that much money.

Also, consider that the DLC has a release schedule into Spring 2019. That's six months post-release. That tells me that this content doesn't really exist right now, which circles back to my point that this content, had it been included in the original game, would have only have pushed the release date back. If Ubisoft came out and said all this content was releasing a month after the game, I'd be just as pissed as you about it, but that's not what's happening here. As things stand, this was a commercial for the deluxe version of the game, and that doesn't really bother me.

Your unhindered acceptance of this business model is the reason why it gets shoved down our throats. I can't slight you, if it is the only experience you have ever known, as possibly a younger gamer, but there was a time when companies released polished, full experiences, that delivered an experience beyond expectations.

I don't want a season pass

I don't want dlc announced months before a game comes out

I don't want day one patches

I don't want to have my expectations 'Re-Aligned' by mass marketing and promotion so that, like yourself, I sell myself short and start to support these shitty fucking business practices. The only way your argument seems honest to me is if you just never got to experience a time when companies had to compete for your money with the best product on the market.
 
Your unhindered acceptance of this business model is the reason why it gets shoved down our throats. I can't slight you, if it is the only experience you have ever known, as possibly a younger gamer, but there was a time when companies released polished, full experiences, that delivered an experience beyond expectations.

I don't want a season pass

I don't want dlc announced months before a game comes out

I don't want day one patches

I don't want to have my expectations 'Re-Aligned' by mass marketing and promotion so that, like yourself, I sell myself short and start to support these shitty fucking business practices. The only way your argument seems honest to me is if you just never got to experience a time when companies had to compete for your money with the best product on the market.

I started gaming in the late 90's, I know full well what you're talking about and the way the industry has changed over the years. It seems to me we just perceive what's happening differently. You appear to view DLC as something that's been taken away from you to be resold later. I view it as content that (usually) was not part of the original game, content that was developed later in hopes to continue to capitalize on a product as much as possible beyond the initial release window. You said it yourself, you expect a polished, full experience. I have no doubts that Odyssey will be anything but. Of course, I could be wrong once it releases, but based on what has been shown or talked about, and what I know to like and dislike about the series as a whole, Odyssey is a game that heavily appeals to me. I seriously doubt that when I wrap up the game after 50+ hours, i'm going to find myself disappointed because the experience was left incomplete by the looming DLC that should have been there from the beginning. The DLC is side stories. It's a way to keep playing the game when the main event is over, and it's entirely optional anyway. If you don't like DLC as a concept, you're obviously welcome to not buy it, but I really can't get behind the logic that DLC is not OK because any potential piece of that game should just be a piece from the start.

I realize we're speculating here, but I'll use Origins to further my point. Origins was one of my favorite releases of 2017. Per Steam, I put exactly 50 hours into it, and I enjoyed every minute of it. For me, that's well worth the $60 I paid. I also did NOT buy any of the games DLC. Even though I enjoyed the game immensely, after 50 hours, I was ready to move onto something else. I don't feel cheated in the slightest because there is more content that exists for that game that I didn't get to experience. I didn't finish the game and feel like something was missing. The game felt like a complete entity as I experienced it. I enjoyed it and I got my money's worth. The fact that more content exists is totally irrelevant to me. The same will likely happen with Odyssey. It's almost certain that I won't buy the DLC for this game and I have no interest in the season pass. That's not because I have a vendetta against the concept, it's just that I rarely find myself wanting more after finishing massive games like this. You think I'm being an apologist or blindly accepting, but you are mistaken. It's more like I really just don't care. It seems like such a silly thing to be bothered by. I don't care if it exists, or how much it costs. It very likely won't exist in my game and I won't feel any worse because of it.

Also, you haven't really acknowledged that this content is being released as far as six months after the game releases. Do you think they've already fully developed all this content and then removed it from the game to be DLC later? Cause I'm pretty sure that's not what's happening. It's being developed after the game releases, ergo it cannot release with the game. That kind of brings me what i'm talking about above... if it's not going to be in the game as it releases no matter what, why does it matter so much that it comes out several months after? Or is the issue entirely rooted in the fact that it's being advertised and/or presold before the games release?
 
I started gaming in the late 90's, I know full well what you're talking about and the way the industry has changed over the years. It seems to me we just perceive what's happening differently. You appear to view DLC as something that's been taken away from you to be resold later. I view it as content that (usually) was not part of the original game, content that was developed later in hopes to continue to capitalize on a product as much as possible beyond the initial release window. You said it yourself, you expect a polished, full experience. I have no doubts that Odyssey will be anything but. Of course, I could be wrong once it releases, but based on what has been shown or talked about, and what I know to like and dislike about the series as a whole, Odyssey is a game that heavily appeals to me. I seriously doubt that when I wrap up the game after 50+ hours, i'm going to find myself disappointed because the experience was left incomplete by the looming DLC that should have been there from the beginning. The DLC is side stories. It's a way to keep playing the game when the main event is over, and it's entirely optional anyway. If you don't like DLC as a concept, you're obviously welcome to not buy it, but I really can't get behind the logic that DLC is not OK because any potential piece of that game should just be a piece from the start.

I realize we're speculating here, but I'll use Origins to further my point. Origins was one of my favorite releases of 2017. Per Steam, I put exactly 50 hours into it, and I enjoyed every minute of it. For me, that's well worth the $60 I paid. I also did NOT buy any of the games DLC. Even though I enjoyed the game immensely, after 50 hours, I was ready to move onto something else. I don't feel cheated in the slightest because there is more content that exists for that game that I didn't get to experience. I didn't finish the game and feel like something was missing. The game felt like a complete entity as I experienced it. I enjoyed it and I got my money's worth. The fact that more content exists is totally irrelevant to me. The same will likely happen with Odyssey. It's almost certain that I won't buy the DLC for this game and I have no interest in the season pass. That's not because I have a vendetta against the concept, it's just that I rarely find myself wanting more after finishing massive games like this. You think I'm being an apologist or blindly accepting, but you are mistaken. It's more like I really just don't care. It seems like such a silly thing to be bothered by. I don't care if it exists, or how much it costs. It very likely won't exist in my game and I won't feel any worse because of it.

Also, you haven't really acknowledged that this content is being released as far as six months after the game releases. Do you think they've already fully developed all this content and then removed it from the game to be DLC later? Cause I'm pretty sure that's not what's happening. It's being developed after the game releases, ergo it cannot release with the game. That kind of brings me what i'm talking about above... if it's not going to be in the game as it releases no matter what, why does it matter so much that it comes out several months after? Or is the issue entirely rooted in the fact that it's being advertised and/or presold before the games release?

happy gaming
 
Back
Top