Assassin's Creed Valhalla

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,854
I spent roughly 6 weeks with Odyssey, so two months of Uplay+ should allow me to play this game for $30. If it's larger than that, $45.
With most games like this I find myself as a meticulous completionist for the first 1/2 to 2/3 of the game. Unless missions change significantly, I then get burned out and end up rushing through the last portions of the game. I'd rather have a shorter game with a wide variety of missions and environments than a massive game with the same quest 50 times.
 

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
16,692
its going the Far Cry route which wasn't necessarily bad...although once we hit 5, its getting bad.

I really like Oddessy though. Never played origins although i own it.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,854
I'm hoping they'll refresh the series again after this one. They probably won't, but they should. Last time they waited way too long and lost people that had bought the previous games in the series. In my case, I can probably stomach one more game (after this one) like Origins and Odyssey before they lose me again. I loved those games, but I can only handle so much of the same thing. I'm a die hard fan, so I have to guess that most other people will lose interest after this one.
 

delita

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,607
I'm hoping they'll refresh the series again after this one. They probably won't, but they should. Last time they waited way too long and lost people that had bought the previous games in the series. In my case, I can probably stomach one more game (after this one) like Origins and Odyssey before they lose me again. I loved those games, but I can only handle so much of the same thing. I'm a die hard fan, so I have to guess that most other people will lose interest after this one.
If it weren't for this one being in my favorite medieval time period, I likely would've passed. I think if they freshen it up enough it could very well be my GOTY. I've had plenty enough time to cool off from Odyssey at this point to be ready to play another entry.

The problem I had with Origins was, I played Odyssey first, loved it, then tried to go one entry back immediately after completing it and play Origins. And I hated it. I was just burnt out.
 

Jumpem

Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
687
I spent roughly 6 weeks with Odyssey, so two months of Uplay+ should allow me to play this game for $30. If it's larger than that, $45.
With most games like this I find myself as a meticulous completionist for the first 1/2 to 2/3 of the game. Unless missions change significantly, I then get burned out and end up rushing through the last portions of the game. I'd rather have a shorter game with a wide variety of missions and environments than a massive game with the same quest 50 times.
I took nine months to get through Odyssey and the DLC. I will buy this, just need to figure out which version and if the extras in the Ultimate Edition are worth much.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,854
If it weren't for this one being in my favorite medieval time period, I likely would've passed. I think if they freshen it up enough it could very well be my GOTY. I've had plenty enough time to cool off from Odyssey at this point to be ready to play another entry.

The problem I had with Origins was, I played Odyssey first, loved it, then tried to go one entry back immediately after completing it and play Origins. And I hated it. I was just burnt out.
I played Origin and then Odyssey roughly 4-5 months apart, so it felt like a natural progression. Odyssey is better than Origins in nearly every way (at least outside of PC performance), so going backward would probably suck. Especially after putting in a lot of time with Odyssey. I could probably go back to the older ones like 3 or Black Flag easier than Origins.
 

Armenius

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
21,831
I tried doing a marathon through the entire series at one point to get caught up, but I got burnt out completely when I reached Revelations. These games are still such a slog to get through, so I'd definitely recommend not playing them back-to-back.
 

Arioch

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
433
I already pre-ordered the Ultimate edition and I did the same with Odyssey and was not disappointed. I can't wait to see the gameplay trailer next week!
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
5,836
I already pre-ordered the Ultimate edition and I did the same with Odyssey and was not disappointed. I can't wait to see the gameplay trailer next week!
Not telling you that you shouldn't, but I'd keep in mind that - at least for PC - its highly likely you'll be able to pre-order any edition of the game you choose at a significant approx 20% discount, if previous precedent holds up. Most Gold or Ultimate edition Ubi games tend to sell keys that activate directly via UPlay through legit keysellers (Humble, GMG, anything on ITAD etc...) and these vendors often have varying sales, up to and including those special events that give you the best deal. A few years ago it used to be able to get in excess of 30% pre-launch this way, but sadly the AAA's have been restricting this a bit though 20%-ish is still common if you keep your eyes open.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
10,581
That's only your own bias speaking. You don't have to be a giant to throw someone around, just strong enough. I guess you've never seen an olympic wrestler or weightlifter. But with that attitude you probably would cover your eyes if you were accidentally exposed to it.
Wrong. Warriors in ancient Greece were practically all men, for obvious reasons. This was true for practically every Assassin's Creed game (with some exceptions I'm sure). Even to this day that is true in practically every ground based fighting force. I think you're nitpicking just for the sake of it.

You still failed to explain how the ability to change the characters appearance makes games so bad. Because it doesn't. Really explain it to me, how would mass effect be better, if your only option was to play as default Shepard.
I've already explained it to you once before. You can read my previous post in the other thread.

Customizing for the sake of customizing is pointless and adds nothing. Lets not pretend Assassin's Creed is Mass Effect. One is an action adventure game that follows a set path through history, the other isn't. Not even remotely the same.

I played Origin and then Odyssey roughly 4-5 months apart, so it felt like a natural progression. Odyssey is better than Origins in nearly every way (at least outside of PC performance), so going backward would probably suck. Especially after putting in a lot of time with Odyssey. I could probably go back to the older ones like 3 or Black Flag easier than Origins.
Combat was better in Origins as it was more dynamic. With berserk arrows, setting poison traps in dead bodies and the like it was far more interesting. At least you could change things up more.

I'm not sure what they can do in this game, but I hope they add more fighting diversity. I hope setting traps and the like makes a big comeback. I'd certainly like to raid coastal forts and the like, but some combat diversity would be needed.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,665
Wrong. Warriors in ancient Greece were practically all men, for obvious reasons. This was true for practically every Assassin's Creed game (with some exceptions I'm sure). Even to this day that is true in practically every ground based fighting force. I think you're nitpicking just for the sake of it.
You are moving the goalpost. The question wasn't whether warriors in ancient greece were all men or not. Although there are some claims circulating about female gladiators but that's neither here nor there.
You were specifically saying that smaller women cannot "throw around" men like that and that it is ridiculous for that reason.
I'm nitpicking? You are the one complaining about the female character option in the game.

I've already explained it to you once before. You can read my previous post in the other thread.
I probably did and found nothing convincing in it, just assertions like this one bellow:
Customizing for the sake of customizing is pointless and adds nothing.
That is only your opinion and isn't remotely universal. To me it makes a huge difference whether I can customize the character to my liking or not. And it certainly doesn't take away anything from the game if the option is there. You can ignore it if you don't want to customize. Odyssey doesn't even have full customization just a choice between two options, and it is not even remotely responsible for the shortcomings of the game, like the grindiness and the repetitive quests.
Lets not pretend Assassin's Creed is Mass Effect.
I don't know what that means. I'm not pretending anything. I'm stating that to me games are more interesting if they have character customization, regardless of it being fantasy, "historic" or scifi.
One is an action adventure game that follows a set path through history, the other isn't. Not even remotely the same.
Both are RPGs, AC stopped being an action game a while ago. They don't have to be the same to have character customization. At this point mass effect is more linear than AC.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
10,581
You are moving the goalpost.
No, see above and below.

Kassandra wasn't exactly petite.
My response then was she was still inadequate, which is what I am still saying. And exactly why men dominated warfare throughout history; men are simply stronger. Physical warfare (which is all Odyssey encompasses)

And seeing Kassandra toss Alexios around was just humorous.
Alexios
Kassandra

Kassandra wasn't fat but she was absolutely weaker than most of the people you fight against in the game. When you're an assassin and most of the kills are sneaking around and sliding a blade into someones back it worked perfectly fine in games like Syndicate. But when you're bum rushing and hacking & slashing, it becomes ridiculous.

I probably did and found nothing convincing in it, just assertions like this one bellow:
You do tend to put your options on a pedestal and have made up your mind on certain things and don't like to see other view points or have the negatives or positives of them compared/contrasted.

And it certainly doesn't take away anything from the game if the option is there.
It does. It minimizes world reflection/reaction to your character's appearance. Some of the most iconic characters have a certain look that is noticed and reflected upon by NPCs. That is lost in games with customization. There were multiple points in Odyssey where I found it awkward that the NPCs didn't take notice of the physical characteristics of the player and that likely had to do with having to write and record multiple dialogue lines if they wanted to add that in. In some parts the dialogue just sounded awkward as they tried to dodge and talk around it. It made your character feel sterile and the world flatter.

I don't know what that means. I'm not pretending anything.
Mass Effect is based around building a character identity and player choice. Not every game is, nor should it be. Assassin's Creed is not in the same boat as Mass Effect. Adding a feature that has net negatives with no real net positives just to shoehorn in something from another game is how we end up with something like ME: Andromeda. A great example of a game that had potential, but tried to throw in things that simply didn't fit with the formula or setting.

Both are RPGs, AC stopped being an action game a while ago. They don't have to be the same to have character customization. At this point mass effect is more linear than AC.
Assassin's Creed is only an RPG because of crappy grinding in the last two titles. It isn't anything like Mass Effect, which was story based RPG with player choice being a central gameplay aspect. In Assassin's Creed you follow through someone's path in history; your path and actions are predetermined. Huge difference. Just because Mass Effect does it doesn't mean Assassin's Creed should. What is great for another game is bad for another.

And I hope they do tone down the MMO RPG style grinding in Valhalla. They say levels won't matter as much but I fear they may shift that onto weapon unlocking even more. I hope I am wrong and they keep that stuff to a minimum. If they can make combat more lethal in Valhalla like previous games that would be wonderful. They claim weapons will be more impactful, but I hope that means letahlity and not just a new animation system. No matter how good your animations are, weapons and combat won't have much impact if you need to bash someone's head in 7 times to knock them down.

For those interested, the rumored release date is Octoboer 16. May not be correct but most AC games recently came out in this month. I bet this will put some heavy strain on modern GPUs. Last game gets in the 50s for me on my RTX 2070, and that is only at 1440.
 
Last edited:

TaintedSquirrel

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Messages
9,682
Kassandra is also a demigod (in Greece terms, anyway). Deimos as well, it's covered as part of the cult storyline. Kass beating Alexios in combat is a stretch, though. The only explanation is her having the spear, and Alexios does not.
 

Derangel

Fully [H]
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,955
No, see above and below.



My response then was she was still inadequate, which is what I am still saying. And exactly why men dominated warfare throughout history; men are simply stronger. Physical warfare (which is all Odyssey encompasses)

And seeing Kassandra toss Alexios around was just humorous.
Alexios
Kassandra

Kassandra wasn't fat but she was absolutely weaker than most of the people you fight against in the game. When you're an assassin and most of the kills are sneaking around and sliding a blade into someones back it worked perfectly fine in games like Syndicate. But when you're bum rushing and hacking & slashing, it becomes ridiculous
It’s a “rock and a hard place” situation. If they do what they did and make her reasonably well built and someone that looks like a fighter than people like you bitch and whine that it’s not “realistic”. Yet, if they made her a huge, muscular women then people would whine about “teh SJW aRe MakIng WomeNz ugly and rUniNg our Gamez”.
 

Flogger23m

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
10,581
It’s a “rock and a hard place” situation. If they do what they did and make her reasonably well built and someone that looks like a fighter than people like you bitch and whine that it’s not “realistic”. Yet, if they made her a huge, muscular women then people would whine about “teh SJW aRe MakIng WomeNz ugly and rUniNg our Gamez”.
You could always replace Kassandra with a more appropriate character for the setting and avoid the issue. Going the extra mile to make a good game is well worth it in the end.

If they want to bring back women protagonists, bring back the assassination gameplay. The game would be better all around anyways. Despite the overall story being very shallow and littered with 3-4 repeating side quests, Syndicate did a good job with Evie, the main mission design, and alternating protagonists. I'd prefer to stick with one but I suppose the alternating route can help give different play styles and takes on things to keep the game from getting stale.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,665
Yet, if they made her a huge, muscular women then people would whine about “teh SJW aRe MakIng WomeNz ugly and rUniNg our Gamez”.
Beauty is not a function of muscularity.
Besides SJWs are more concerned with dressing them up in burkas against the "evil male gaze". So it stops mattering what the character looks like at that point.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
18,198
et, if they made her a huge, muscular women then people would whine about “teh SJW aRe MakIng WomeNz ugly and rUniNg our Gamez”.
no not if there isnt an agenda being pushed and expescially if they look like this

1588774950656.png

silje from norsemen. watch it if you havent btw.
 

RanceJustice

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
5,836
Ugh.. I have to agree. Come on, pre-rendered animated scenes are not "gameplay" as people expect. They could have avoided a lot of flak by simply calling it another cinematic trailer that just so happens to show a few mechanics (ie the battering ram, the dual axes being used / thrown etc...). Don't call it a "gameplay" trailer unless you're actually showcasing a slice of player-perspective gameplay!
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,812
What are you talking about? The title of the video is literally 'Cinematic World Premier'.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
18,198

this is the gameplay video, its not really gameplay but it is in game footage, not a cinematic cutscene.
 

Viper87227

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
17,564
Ubisoft about to catch a bunch of shit over todays "gameplay" trailer...
This was my first thought when I watched. Just because it's in-engine doesn't mean it's gameplay. I'm skeptical that even really represents the visual quality we can expect, but it sure as shit tells us nothing about gameplay.
 

Mchart

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 7, 2004
Messages
3,812
I can easily believe that level of visual quality given the improvements to the engine with Breakpoint, and this coming out end of this year.
 

Q-BZ

Fully [H]
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
18,509
I think we all know the game will look good. That's an unfortunate title for that video.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,665
this is the gameplay video, its not really gameplay but it is in game footage, not a cinematic cutscene.
It is cinematic from beginning to end, not one second of in game footage in that. Rendered with the game engine does not make it game footage.
Why did they have to drop the ball so hard? All they had to do was call it what it is: cinematic trailer 2, instead of hyping it up to be a "gameplay trailer" this is not a gameplay trailer.
The like/dislike ratio is fully deserved.
 

pendragon1

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Messages
18,198
It is cinematic from beginning to end, not one second of in game footage in that. Rendered with the game engine does not make it game footage.
Why did they have to drop the ball so hard? All they had to do was call it what it is: cinematic trailer 2, instead of hyping it up to be a "gameplay trailer" this is not a gameplay trailer.
The like/dislike ratio is fully deserved.
and? youre not gonna play it anyways, youll find all sorts of reasons to call it crap and how they failed at implementing this or that, the clang of the sword isnt modeled correctly or whatever.
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,854
As someone who has trained with some high level female fighters, there's a reason they have different gender and weight divisions. While someone like Ronda Rousey or Amanda Nunez can put a beating on most men their size...they're still 135 lbs. They're also losing to the elite guys in their same weight class 8/10 times as well. I've seen it. They aren't going to be doing much of anything with an elite warrior that outweighs them by 50 lbs.
Still, there are at least a couple women warriors/fighters who ARE the same size as most men. Not many, but a few. They're usually involved in wrestling or acting because it's not like there's anyone else for them to fight.
It's a damn video game, though. If you toss in some supernatural shit (like AC tends to do), it's not that crazy.
 

GOD'SlittleSERVANT

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
7,112
As someone who has trained with some high level female fighters, there's a reason they have different gender and weight divisions. While someone like Ronda Rousey or Amanda Nunez can put a beating on most men their size...they're still 135 lbs. They're also losing to the elite guys in their same weight class 8/10 times as well. I've seen it. They aren't going to be doing much of anything with an elite warrior that outweighs them by 50 lbs.
Still, there are at least a couple women warriors/fighters who ARE the same size as most men. Not many, but a few. They're usually involved in wrestling or acting because it's not like there's anyone else for them to fight.
It's a damn video game, though. If you toss in some supernatural shit (like AC tends to do), it's not that crazy.
10/10 times, not 8/10 times.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,665
And you don't think misrepresenting a trailer as gameplay when it clearly isn't is foolish and unnecessary?
I mean if someone offered me a drink but gave me tapwater instead I'd think that he's taking me for a fool.
And people generally don't like it when someone tries to take the mickey out of them.
youre not gonna play it anyways, youll find all sorts of reasons to call it crap and how they failed at implementing this or that, the clang of the sword isnt modeled correctly or whatever.
And what gave you that idea, and why are you so angry? And for what, that I dared pointing out that they so casually misrepresented the actual nature of the trailer?
 

Domingo

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 30, 2004
Messages
17,854
10/10 times, not 8/10 times.
Partially true unless there's a significant gap in a particular area. For instance I've seen a ju-jitsu brown belt female own several guys on the UFC roster. On the mat, they had absolutely nothing for her and they were going 100%. She was smaller than all but one of them, too. This was 8'ish years ago.
Germaine de Randemie and Cyborg have won mixed gender bouts before in striking, so it can work standing, too.
Trick is, there aren't many people on the roster that aren't at least a purple belt or something comparable in another discipline. MMA might not be a fair comparison right now since it has evolved so quickly.
 

M76

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 12, 2012
Messages
10,665
im not. most of the time you complain about games and then say you arent gonna play them anyways.
You are probably confusing me with someone else. If I post in a game's topic that is because I was interested in the game. But that doesn't mean I put on the rose glasses and ignore every mistake they make.
There are two things that sure will turn me away from a game: it only being available on the epic store, or the windows store.
why'd you quote me if you dont want a responce?!
I wanted a response, a proper response not complete dismissal through baseless accusations.
So why does it bother you that I pointed out the clear misrepresentation on their part?
 

GOD'SlittleSERVANT

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 18, 2001
Messages
7,112
Partially true unless there's a significant gap in a particular area. For instance I've seen a ju-jitsu brown belt female own several guys on the UFC roster. On the mat, they had absolutely nothing for her and they were going 100%. She was smaller than all but one of them, too. This was 8'ish years ago.
Germaine de Randemie and Cyborg have won mixed gender bouts before in striking, so it can work standing, too.
Trick is, there aren't many people on the roster that aren't at least a purple belt or something comparable in another discipline. MMA might not be a fair comparison right now since it has evolved so quickly.
You said elite in the same weight class.

I know Cyborg and Germaine are beasts, but there is a 0 chance they would stand a chance against elite fighters in their class. Now, your elite and my elite might be different. When I hear the word "elite", I think a top 5 or even a top 10.

And there is a 0 chance a brown belt female would submit an elite brown belt male.
 

firas

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
the only RPG games I played in my life are:
Alone in the dark back in the play station 1 days (couldn't complete it because it was too scary for me)
Skyrim
little of Witcher (I don't know why I feel it's too complicated for my old small brain)

Assassin's Creed Origins & Assassin's Creed Odyssey: never played an AC game before, completed both, gorgeous stunning visuals. I choose easy and just enjoy the atmosphere, sometimes I call my wife to tell her look at those beautiful fields and stuff, seriously .... did 500 designers spend 3000 hours each to build this game?!

I will try to upgrade my old rusty GPU for Valhalla
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this

Jumpem

Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2000
Messages
687
the only RPG games I played in my life are:
Alone in the dark back in the play station 1 days (couldn't complete it because it was too scary for me)
Skyrim
little of Witcher (I don't know why I feel it's too complicated for my old small brain)

Assassin's Creed Origins & Assassin's Creed Odyssey: never played an AC game before, completed both, gorgeous stunning visuals. I choose easy and just enjoy the atmosphere, sometimes I call my wife to tell her look at those beautiful fields and stuff, seriously .... did 500 designers spend 3000 hours each to build this game?!

I will try to upgrade my old rusty GPU for Valhalla
Odyssey was the best looking game I have ever played. The setting and scenery were superb. I can't wait for this one.
 
Top