FarCry imo is the only good one of the "Ubisoft Open World games"

[Dalisclock]

Unless you believe the conspiracy theory....

Said conspiracy theory being? (For those who live under a rock...)


I'd like AC to go back to the Crusades and have a game centred on Altair's sons, and it's high time the series went back to that era.

I suspect it's the age old theory that all of the games are really being seen through the eyes of someone in the future and the modern day protagonist is yet another historical person. Kind of an inception mutiple levels thing.

AC Revelations did follow up on Altair's life after AC1 but for short 5-10 min segments centered around the assassin fortress in Syria, viewed through a series of Recorded memories that Ezio was collecting.

At this point, there's only one Ubisoft game(not counting games like Valiant Hearts which somehow get made every so often) and you just pick your particular perferred flavor of it. Personally the AC games always grabbed me more then the FC series but I suspect that's because I'm a history Buff.

I liked FC3 but the rest of the series hasn't proven that interesting to me.

 

[Something Amyss]

Unless you believe the conspiracy theory....

Said conspiracy theory being? (For those who live under a rock...)

Spoiler

The whole idea that William Miles must sent the "Templars" to motivate Layla. That's the real reason they die so easily and so on. Which makes little sense from a player perspective, as it's possible to reach a failure state implying death and as such we're given a sense it's real rather than a recruitment tool, but I guess unreliable narrator or something.

At this point, there's only one Ubisoft game(not counting games like Valiant Hearts which somehow get made every so often) and you just pick your particular perferred flavor of it. Personally the AC games always grabbed me more then the FC series but I suspect that's because I'm a history Buff.

I suspect my interest in AC starts with being a mild history nerd (my dad is a history major and authored historical fiction I won't mention on here because enough personal info about me is online) and ends with just being a nerd and the Animus is one of the cooler framing devices. It's not quite a Stargate or the TARDIS, but it's a cool, if absurd, concept. My interest tends to wax and wane with the setting involved, though it's not always a given the games I like most will be the ones I am most familiar with the settings of.

I tend to tire of the Ubisoft formula otherwise. I've got a couple of the MP games (Wildlands, the Division) because my tolerance for a game increases when my friends are around to snark at it, but otherwise...I mean, even games I'd otherwise enjoy get bogged down by Ubisoft mechanics (the Crew is fun as an open world racing game, but towers? Really?), so AC being my jam is more or less my level of investment in the basic concept.

 

[SckizoBoy]

I suspect it's the age old theory that all of the games are really being seen through the eyes of someone in the future and the modern day protagonist is yet another historical person. Kind of an inception mutiple levels thing.

AC Revelations did follow up on Altair's life after AC1 but for short 5-10 min segments centered around the assassin fortress in Syria, viewed through a series of Recorded memories that Ezio was collecting.

Yeah, I remember those AC:R sections and they were good (not gameplay-wise, that side was a tad boring), but for the story, as it continued Altair's story and showed how much he was still badass in his dotage.

Having a game where you play as his son (Darim probably), with the tutorials as a kid under Altair's guidance, training alongside/competing with Sef, and charting his career to becoming Mentor in the Levant, including his reaction to Sef's death.

At this point, there's only one Ubisoft game(not counting games like Valiant Hearts which somehow get made every so often) and you just pick your particular perferred flavor of it. Personally the AC games always grabbed me more then the FC series but I suspect that's because I'm a history Buff.

Yep... with you on all counts there. I enjoy my history, too, so playing the ACII trilogy was pretty educational given the Renaissance is one of my weaker areas, and finding all the adjustments they made for narrative reasons (reasonable or otherwise... mostly reasonable) was kinda fun.

Spoiler

The whole idea that William Miles must sent the "Templars" to motivate Layla. That's the real reason they die so easily and so on. Which makes little sense from a player perspective, as it's possible to reach a failure state implying death and as such we're given a sense it's real rather than a recruitment tool, but I guess unreliable narrator or something.

Erm... OK...?(!)

I suspect my interest in AC starts with being a mild history nerd (my dad is a history major and authored historical fiction I won't mention on here because enough personal info about me is online) and ends with just being a nerd and the Animus is one of the cooler framing devices. It's not quite a Stargate or the TARDIS, but it's a cool, if absurd, concept. My interest tends to wax and wane with the setting involved, though it's not always a given the games I like most will be the ones I am most familiar with the settings of.

I liked the concept too, but the execution can be hit and miss with the protagonist involvement with historical events. It's why I think that despite its endless flaws, Unity was pretty good in this regard, because it turned the idea on its head (as did Black Flag to a certain extent). Everything Arno does is merely an attempt to stop things from happening and he basically fails throughout the whole thing. It's why ACIII (well, one of the many reasons) and Syndicate bugged the hell out of me.

As for Odyssey, haven't got it yet, but I'm aware it goes into Greek Mythology mahoosively (plus one borderline egregious character-time displacement), so even though it has the tag, and given its vast differences from the last AC game I genuinely enjoyed (BF), I'm ignoring the name entirely...!

 

[Something Amyss]

Erm... OK...?(!)

Did you play Origins? If not, it probably makes no sense.

Spoiler

In one of the present segments, framing character Layla Hassan and her bestie are besieged by Abstergo. Layla's friend gets killed in her remote location, but Layla uses a hidden blade from the site and skills she picked up from the Bleeding Effect in order to dispatch her attackers. Layla then drops back into the Animus, because when bad guys swarm you with one wave of guys, the best thing to do is to go back into a position which is easily compromised.

In order to reconcile this, people have speculated that William Miles, who recruits Layla to the Assassins at the end (she worked for Abstergo, but had gone rogue) set things up to make her sympathetic to the Assassin's order, because her new Animus tech was incredibly valuable and would give them a leg up. As a result, William had layla's friend killed and staged an attack to motivate her.

I prefer a more Occam's Razor approach, which involves the limit on their capability because the Assassins and Templars are both dumb due to spotty writing, combined with the above issue with gunplay, which is what this was all an oblique reference to)

It's kinda lame, but it was more a footnote to Saelune's comment about an inability to handle gunplay.

I liked the concept too, but the execution can be hit and miss with the protagonist involvement with historical events. It's why I think that despite its endless flaws, Unity was pretty good in this regard, because it turned the idea on its head (as did Black Flag to a certain extent). Everything Arno does is merely an attempt to stop things from happening and he basically fails throughout the whole thing. It's why ACIII (well, one of the many reasons) and Syndicate bugged the hell out of me.

As for Odyssey, haven't got it yet, but I'm aware it goes into Greek Mythology mahoosively (plus one borderline egregious character-time displacement), so even though it has the tag, and given its vast differences from the last AC game I genuinely enjoyed (BF), I'm ignoring the name entirely...!

No arguent about execution. One of the biggest problems I've had with the series is less about the quality of the history or even the action, but just that if we're expected to spend hours with a main character, they'd better be tolerable. They seem to be 50-50 on characters I can get behind, which won't automatically pass or fail a game but can tip it if I'm close.

I bought Odyssey on the strength of Origins. I really, really liked Origins. I liked the framing (much as I ever have, anyway), liked the protagonist, liked the setting, and even liked the RPG elements they added. It was a huge world that was actually fun to explore, and the Ubisoft elements didn't really bug me.

What's killed Odyssey for me is the RPG elements. Origins introduced Animus glitches in the form of three "gods" you could fight, and I figured the ahistorical critters would be like that. That bugs me is that I seem to have offended RNGesus in the first game where that really matters. I'm overleveled for the area I'm in, and even with special abilities, headshots won't take down enemies 2-3 levels below me. Most of my gear drops have been Warrior or Assassin bonuses, which don't fit my playstyle (as you have enough power for assassinations and I prefer avoiding direct combat). Quests are grindy, enemies are damage spongy, and so I get bored fast. Since the game doesn't like you upgrading stuff, you need to replace your gear regularly to keep up, and it's just not fun when you lose the ability to play your way. So far, the story's been good, but the intervening stuff has not been. One of the things I buy Creed games for is having to play smart with stealth and killing people from the shadows. Origins slightly changed this, but Odyssey rewrote the book and it's just not fun to me.

I might go further, but at this point, I don't even know if ?'ll make it to the point where I see the magic beasts and find out what the dealio is.

I guess the problem is I felt that the mythology element cold be interesting, but the game pads itself out sop much I'll never find out. People call this the Witcher 3's successor, and I gave up on that game because it bored me, too. I guess this is what RPG fans want, though? 60 hours of busywork to pad out a 10 hour story.

 

[SckizoBoy]

Huh, totally missed this, 'cos notifications ain't working and I'm a lazy fucker... anyway...

Did you play Origins? If not, it probably makes no sense.

No I did not, hence, thanks for that heads up.

Spoiler

In one of the present segments, framing character Layla Hassan and her bestie are besieged by Abstergo. Layla's friend gets killed in her remote location, but Layla uses a hidden blade from the site and skills she picked up from the Bleeding Effect in order to dispatch her attackers. Layla then drops back into the Animus, because when bad guys swarm you with one wave of guys, the best thing to do is to go back into a position which is easily compromised.

In order to reconcile this, people have speculated that William Miles, who recruits Layla to the Assassins at the end (she worked for Abstergo, but had gone rogue) set things up to make her sympathetic to the Assassin's order, because her new Animus tech was incredibly valuable and would give them a leg up. As a result, William had layla's friend killed and staged an attack to motivate her.

I prefer a more Occam's Razor approach, which involves the limit on their capability because the Assassins and Templars are both dumb due to spotty writing, combined with the above issue with gunplay, which is what this was all an oblique reference to)

It's kinda lame, but it was more a footnote to Saelune's comment about an inability to handle gunplay.

I see... sort of, but again, thanks for the explanation.

snip the rest

Eh, the RPG elements were pretty divisive for Origins AFAIK, so Ubisoft doubling down on it was bound to ruffle a few (more) feathers. I don't mind it, and the lack of upgrading actually suits me 'cos I consider it red tape to gameplay and prefer loot-hunting. Still, I'll say right away that I will get bored/peeved of/with certain aspects and probably not finish it for some months after I get it as I'll stop playing it within a couple weeks, then go back to it. I have a weird relationship with games.

Weirdly, when I first played AC:BF, I got to Havana... like the first proper piece of civilisation in the game you actually encounter, started free roam and rage-quit...! Yeah... Then came back to it some months later and had a whale of a time. And it doesn't matter about genre either. I love Napoleon:Total War, but the second half of the Prussian main campaign inexplicably pissed me off so much, I uninstalled it. Anyway, my gaming ADHD leads me to suspect AC:Ody may be a similar experience.

 

[Something Amyss]

Eh, the RPG elements were pretty divisive for Origins AFAIK, so Ubisoft doubling down on it was bound to ruffle a few (more) feathers. I don't mind it, and the lack of upgrading actually suits me 'cos I consider it red tape to gameplay and prefer loot-hunting. Still, I'll say right away that I will get bored/peeved of/with certain aspects and probably not finish it for some months after I get it as I'll stop playing it within a couple weeks, then go back to it. I have a weird relationship with games.

I liked the RPG elements in ACO. I don't like them here because they make it more loot-heavy and you can get screwed by the RNG pretty easily. Looking online, I'm far from the only person finding themselves going more tan five levels without getting gear that fits the tree they want to focus on (Hunter in my case). It ends up with pretty serious detriments to your skills. Sure, you can keep respeccing your skills, but it costs money in a game that's already somewhat stingy and it makes gearing up quite a pain in the neck when it also prohibits you from upgrading the gear you actually want.

Part of the problem is that gear never really seems to do enough. I don't know if this is where I mentioned it before, but I was over the level cap in the area I was in by 4 with a focus on hunter (ranged) and found myself under-prepared to take out common soldiers with headshots--some of them were surviving headshots from my bow with my special abilities providing me large boosts. The gear I started getting was all assassin or warrior, and I do enough damage to most targets in assassination already, and I find similar issues with warrior in that speccing out a warrior build doesn't seem to greatly impact my time to kill someone in a direct fight. TBH, I don't find it much longer to take down mercenaries than your average soldier in a fight. Granted, I open with a non-assassinating-assassination, but still.

And the solution I see offered online involves builds that require me to get loot I am simply not getting from drops. The hunter tree can apparently be quite deadly with the right skills and gear, but...I'm missing half that equation and after a while that becomes a problem.

And I get that part of the problem is me. I could just spec all warrior gear, get slightly better time-to-kill, and go in guns-a-blazing, but the irony is if I wanted to go in guns-a-blazing I probably wouldn't have bought Assassin's Creed. The fun for me has always been trying to get that flawless stealth run or massacring the entire base without alerting anyone if all else fails. But I see a bunch of complaints online about getting the right gear, and I can't help but think the reason things are this difficult for so many people is to sell you the shiny legendaries not enough people bought in Origins because they weren't necessary (and in fact, could be founf in Heka chests for regular money--none of this orichalcum crap).

Even still, I'm used to loot-based games either being more specific (Rogue gear for Rogues, Paladin gear for Paladins) or offering much more loot (the Borderlands series barely let me leave the safe zones without me practically tripping over my next weapon, and I still had the vending machines as backup, or even the Division gave you lots of gear choices up to end game).

I think I'm just beating a dead horse at this point, but it's not the RNG. It's not the loot mechanic. It's the sum of all its parts, and I think that sum was specifically tuned for a store full of MTs.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Eh, the RPG elements were pretty divisive for Origins AFAIK, so Ubisoft doubling down on it was bound to ruffle a few (more) feathers. I don't mind it, and the lack of upgrading actually suits me 'cos I consider it red tape to gameplay and prefer loot-hunting. Still, I'll say right away that I will get bored/peeved of/with certain aspects and probably not finish it for some months after I get it as I'll stop playing it within a couple weeks, then go back to it. I have a weird relationship with games.

I liked the RPG elements in ACO. I don't like them here because they make it more loot-heavy and you can get screwed by the RNG pretty easily. Looking online, I'm far from the only person finding themselves going more tan five levels without getting gear that fits the tree they want to focus on (Hunter in my case). It ends up with pretty serious detriments to your skills. Sure, you can keep respeccing your skills, but it costs money in a game that's already somewhat stingy and it makes gearing up quite a pain in the neck when it also prohibits you from upgrading the gear you actually want.

Part of the problem is that gear never really seems to do enough. I don't know if this is where I mentioned it before, but I was over the level cap in the area I was in by 4 with a focus on hunter (ranged) and found myself under-prepared to take out common soldiers with headshots--some of them were surviving headshots from my bow with my special abilities providing me large boosts. The gear I started getting was all assassin or warrior, and I do enough damage to most targets in assassination already, and I find similar issues with warrior in that speccing out a warrior build doesn't seem to greatly impact my time to kill someone in a direct fight. TBH, I don't find it much longer to take down mercenaries than your average soldier in a fight. Granted, I open with a non-assassinating-assassination, but still.

And the solution I see offered online involves builds that require me to get loot I am simply not getting from drops. The hunter tree can apparently be quite deadly with the right skills and gear, but...I'm missing half that equation and after a while that becomes a problem.

And I get that part of the problem is me. I could just spec all warrior gear, get slightly better time-to-kill, and go in guns-a-blazing, but the irony is if I wanted to go in guns-a-blazing I probably wouldn't have bought Assassin's Creed. The fun for me has always been trying to get that flawless stealth run or massacring the entire base without alerting anyone if all else fails. But I see a bunch of complaints online about getting the right gear, and I can't help but think the reason things are this difficult for so many people is to sell you the shiny legendaries not enough people bought in Origins because they weren't necessary (and in fact, could be founf in Heka chests for regular money--none of this orichalcum crap).

Even still, I'm used to loot-based games either being more specific (Rogue gear for Rogues, Paladin gear for Paladins) or offering much more loot (the Borderlands series barely let me leave the safe zones without me practically tripping over my next weapon, and I still had the vending machines as backup, or even the Division gave you lots of gear choices up to end game).

I think I'm just beating a dead horse at this point, but it's not the RNG. It's not the loot mechanic. It's the sum of all its parts, and I think that sum was specifically tuned for a store full of MTs.

I just want to say that Far Cry Primal is a great game, probably the best in the series, and you are missing out.

Have Noah Cadwell Gerveis convince you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwgEyjxcfoY

 

[SckizoBoy]

I liked the RPG elements in ACO. I don't like them here because they make it more loot-heavy and you can get screwed by the RNG pretty easily. Looking online, I'm far from the only person finding themselves going more tan five levels without getting gear that fits the tree they want to focus on (Hunter in my case). It ends up with pretty serious detriments to your skills. Sure, you can keep respeccing your skills, but it costs money in a game that's already somewhat stingy and it makes gearing up quite a pain in the neck when it also prohibits you from upgrading the gear you actually want.

Eh, I play enough dice-based games that I'm thoroughly accustomed to getting screwed by the RNG, but I get your point, even if I think it'll be less of an issue for me (as mentioned, this is a swings-and-roundabouts thing since I prefer loot-system over upgrades as it's, for me at least, less thinking on my part, something I want to do less of when gaming, it's why I play TW on easy and just build historically accurate armies, it's less thinking on my part!).

Part of the problem is that gear never really seems to do enough. I don't know if this is where I mentioned it before, but I was over the level cap in the area I was in by 4 with a focus on hunter (ranged) and found myself under-prepared to take out common soldiers with headshots--some of them were surviving headshots from my bow with my special abilities providing me large boosts. The gear I started getting was all assassin or warrior, and I do enough damage to most targets in assassination already, and I find similar issues with warrior in that speccing out a warrior build doesn't seem to greatly impact my time to kill someone in a direct fight. TBH, I don't find it much longer to take down mercenaries than your average soldier in a fight. Granted, I open with a non-assassinating-assassination, but still.

And the solution I see offered online involves builds that require me to get loot I am simply not getting from drops. The hunter tree can apparently be quite deadly with the right skills and gear, but...I'm missing half that equation and after a while that becomes a problem.

Since I didn't play AC:O (the setting didn't interest me and the more overt change to skills & levelling had me reacting with a 'whelming' meh...), I'm not entirely sure what I'm getting myself into with AC:Ody, but given that I suck (Hunter is probably my worst class of the three, based on what I know of them), I'll likely go for a slightly more generalist character and take it where my whim takes me. Haven't the faintest what that'll do for my playthrough, but we'll see.

And I get that part of the problem is me. I could just spec all warrior gear, get slightly better time-to-kill, and go in guns-a-blazing, but the irony is if I wanted to go in guns-a-blazing I probably wouldn't have bought Assassin's Creed.

A fair point, but I never really played AC for the stealth system because it could be enraging at times (tailing in AC3, ship stealth in AC4:BF etc.), or rather, I gave it a great deal of slack (in the more rope to muck up with sense, rather than forgiving it, don't know if there's a functional difference, but in my head, there is...) and tooled myself up for combat, but (attempted to) play(ed) stealthily, if that makes any sense.

The fun for me has always been trying to get that flawless stealth run or massacring the entire base without alerting anyone if all else fails.

Something I can appreciate, even if it isn't for me. I do that sort of thing purely by accident more often than not...

Thing is, stealth for AC:Ody is pretty much out of the window for me because I'm disowning the 'AC' tag on the game, and the PC is a Spartan-born Dorian mercenary raised amongst Ionians, which really doesn't lend itself to anything 'assassin' based. But eh... play as one desires.

But I see a bunch of complaints online about getting the right gear, and I can't help but think the reason things are this difficult for so many people is to sell you the shiny legendaries not enough people bought in Origins because they weren't necessary (and in fact, could be founf in Heka chests for regular money--none of this orichalcum crap).

Even still, I'm used to loot-based games either being more specific (Rogue gear for Rogues, Paladin gear for Paladins) or offering much more loot (the Borderlands series barely let me leave the safe zones without me practically tripping over my next weapon, and I still had the vending machines as backup, or even the Division gave you lots of gear choices up to end game).

I think I'm just beating a dead horse at this point, but it's not the RNG. It's not the loot mechanic. It's the sum of all its parts, and I think that sum was specifically tuned for a store full of MTs.

Something that may bother me... :/ I'm pretty much committed to getting it, so I'll see how it goes once I'm a few hours in. Still, that's one thing that annoys me, loot being excessive, as I end up spending an inordinate amount of time comparing stuff/saving it for when it 'might' be useful (though in this context, I'll out-level it sooner or later which sort of cuts that aspect down). It's part of the reason I liked Kingdoms of Amalur, insomuch that I only had to look at a weapon name and know whether I could even use it effectively or ditch it (class specific weapon-based move-sets and passive buffs). Specific gear is better, but generally leaves my in-character mode suspicious, 'cos (perhaps hypocritically) I like wading through a modicum of junk and doing that blas? thing of chucking stuff over one's shoulder, before scuttling over to it and shrugging, figuring it could be worth a couple copper bits or something like that. So maybe the AC:Ody system may suit me, but as you imply, I (too) may run into the problem that I have to dump nearly everything I come across, something that will definitely be a wrinkle in mine (or, well, anyone's) experience. :/

 

[Something Amyss]

A fair point, but I never really played AC for the stealth system because it could be enraging at times (tailing in AC3, ship stealth in AC4:BF etc.), or rather, I gave it a great deal of slack (in the more rope to muck up with sense, rather than forgiving it, don't know if there's a functional difference, but in my head, there is...) and tooled myself up for combat, but (attempted to) play(ed) stealthily, if that makes any sense.

TBF, most of the games were kind of bad at it. IV was decent on land, Brotherhood made stealth more actually critical, but usually it was kind of pigeonholed as "hide in this box" or whatever and any sneaking was kind of dodgy. Still is, somewhat, as I get spotted through things like a mountain case sometimes, but Origins was the first game in a while that really scratched my itch.

The reality is that it's probably time for me to look for a new series to do that. But part of my reaction is specifically because Origins did it pretty well. It also didn't hurt that many of the videos I saw involved stealthing baddies (though there are plenty of combat vids as well) and I got pretty psyched by that.

Again, it runs into that catch 22 of I might have felt different about the game had I gone in with different expectations, but had I gone in with different expectations, I might not have bothered anyway." Playing in Greece is admittedly cool, but combat's always been a pretty weak point in AC games and any steps taken by ACO were negated by this one turning everyone into damage sponges. I know some people really like that, but it's definitely not for me.

Thing is, stealth for AC:Ody is pretty much out of the window for me because I'm disowning the 'AC' tag on the game, and the PC is a Spartan-born Dorian mercenary raised amongst Ionians, which really doesn't lend itself to anything 'assassin' based. But eh... play as one desires.

It'll be interesting to see how that works out, as the game still does stealth and may mandate it. It also has the usual pieces of Eden/ancients/Assassin Order stuff, though people have told me it's the least intrusive here that it's ever been. I honestly don't know how vital stealth is. There's a lot more open combat in this game because it...is...SPA *ahem* so it maye work out fine.

But I see a bunch of complaints online about getting the right gear, and I can't help but think the reason things are this difficult for so many people is to sell you the shiny legendaries not enough people bought in Origins because they weren't necessary (and in fact, could be founf in Heka chests for regular money--none of this orichalcum crap).

Even still, I'm used to loot-based games either being more specific (Rogue gear for Rogues, Paladin gear for Paladins) or offering much more loot (the Borderlands series barely let me leave the safe zones without me practically tripping over my next weapon, and I still had the vending machines as backup, or even the Division gave you lots of gear choices up to end game).

I think I'm just beating a dead horse at this point, but it's not the RNG. It's not the loot mechanic. It's the sum of all its parts, and I think that sum was specifically tuned for a store full of MTs.

Something that may bother me... :/ I'm pretty much committed to getting it, so I'll see how it goes once I'm a few hours in. Still, that's one thing that annoys me, loot being excessive, as I end up spending an inordinate amount of time comparing stuff/saving it for when it 'might' be useful (though in this context, I'll out-level it sooner or later which sort of cuts that aspect down). It's part of the reason I liked Kingdoms of Amalur, insomuch that I only had to look at a weapon name and know whether I could even use it effectively or ditch it (class specific weapon-based move-sets and passive buffs). Specific gear is better, but generally leaves my in-character mode suspicious, 'cos (perhaps hypocritically) I like wading through a modicum of junk and doing that blas? thing of chucking stuff over one's shoulder, before scuttling over to it and shrugging, figuring it could be worth a couple copper bits or something like that. So maybe the AC:Ody system may suit me, but as you imply, I (too) may run into the problem that I have to dump nearly everything I come across, something that will definitely be a wrinkle in mine (or, well, anyone's) experience. :/

You might also not get screwed by RNGesus like I did. I mean, I play D&D and I'm used to bad luck (low stat rolls, bad loot, bad rolls in general), and so I know this can be a thing but I need to feel engaged to roll up a new character and I'm not sure I can be bothered.

Oncve I've simmered for a while, I might just crank the difficulty down to easy and see if it becomes fun again. I usually don't bother with lower difficulties, but maybe it'll salvage the game for me.