Five games with Desmond leading up to what I thought would be a modern setting game with sci-fi tech, training with Ezio's memories and everything... Then Desmond suddenly dies pushing a button and we get to play a nameless cooperate employee that's just using his DNA? Genuinely can't fathom the choice.
The platforming peaked in AC2 or Brotherhood. 3 was a downgrade with its awkwardly scripted trees and building parts. The emphasis there seemed to be on making it more "cinematic". Then Unity was another huge downgrade where they automated away most of the brain activity you would still have in the earlier games. In Unity you're just holding a general direction and watching fancy animations. No point doing anything more - the game will ignore your inputs and take some automated route any way. I think we can leave an analysis of when AC became bad at this because platforming is literally 90+% of the PLAY TIME. What you actually spend your time DOING in AC games is moving from A to B. The only other thing that's worth examining would be combat. But frankly AC's combat was never good or deep to begin with. The combat probably peaked in 2 or Brotherhood as well but who cares.
I remember playing black flag for the first time expecting am assassin experience. I had played all of the games leading up to it, and wad excited. When one of the first cutscenes in the game is Edward looting the corpse of an assassin and finding the hidden blades, shrugging and ditching them, I was a little bamboozled, but it made sense for the character, and i figured things would turn around. Things turned around when somebody mistakes him for an assassin, guves him new hidden blades, and asks him to perform some stealth takedowns. He does all of this with no issues whatsoever. THAT was a slap in the face. No training, no character arc, nothing. Just "oh ya, heres some assassin's creed stuff, but hes really just a pirate though"
"Fill out your check list and leave" that's how I attempted to play odyssey. I played om easy though because I'm not much of an RPG guy. The only reason I'm stomaching this is because it's assassins creed and I'm determined to play every game.
Origins and Odessey were good. Origins, imo, was great. Odessey was decent because Ubisoft was trying to do the same thing again like it did before "reboot" with Rogue, Unity and Syndicate. Yearly release with almost the same mechanic, just like they have done with Far Cry, just like how EA does with their sports franchise, how FIFA has been the same since 2016. Assassin's Creed went wrong with Syndicate, which they fixed with a good reboot, but they fucked it up with Valhalla. In my opinion, Assassin's Creed Valhalla is the worst AC game ever made.
I still don't get why modern games rarely implement AC's dynamic character movement, like Spider-Man or Ghost of Tsushima. Despite all the high quality graphics, these characters just stare at the wall for hours and never even once curious to interact with them.
Started at Syndicate. Odyssey is the best game I've ever owned. Assassin or not, it's been worthy of five FULL DLC replays. No idea who Ezio is, but my Kassandra has his armour. Valhalla is a disappointment. Side note...Kassandra is hotter than Evie or female Eivor. 😎
Assassins creed syndicate was the last assassins creed i think in story telling format as i enjoyed the story of it more then the game and how it linked in to past and future the last good game was rogue a underrated game and black flag oh and freedom cry the forgot DLC of black flag was so good and so underrated that game as was so different and good playing the templar in rogue and seeing assassins were just as bad as them at times and they are not always the good guys. And the ship stuff was just peak assassins creed for me as the new ones now with RPG stuff and level locked areas just makes it drag on and you forget what the story is even about i remember most AC story from past games but ask me what happens in the last 3 cant even remember what the story was about all i remember is it looked good graphics wise that's it. assassin's creed origins is when for me it played down the assassins stuff and focused more on RPG stuff felt like a different game completely with assassins creed being a after thought or last min change to AC so it would sell and not gamble on a new IP. And AC now just not my thing anymore i not even buy the last one Valhalla for me was the turn off point was a good game but just not a good assassins creed game and the fantasy elements turn to 100 over the top AC is dead and will never go back to what it was before people need to learn that.
Went down hill after they offed Desmond. While black flag was a good pirate game, it wasn't a good assassin creed game, and I lost interest in the ones after that due to story.
Are there any parts of it that are different now? I don’t really see what it changes. Shadows still has a niche to fill, and its ability to fill it will determine if it can stand out from other games. Perhaps Ghost of Yotei will attempt to shift niche; we know there will be more weapon variety and we know we are leaning up against the Tokugawa shogunate, but how much the game actually wants to explore that remains to be seen. GoT was very happy to be self contained, avoiding real historical characters and sticking to wilderness settings for the most part. But from a 2 minute trailer? No point in trying to judge yet
The AC series started going downhill for me after the first game. Not saying the Ezio games and the few that came after were bad, because they're definitely fun to play, but they got more and more "arcadey" ever since. AC1 has this unique feel to it that's different from the rest of the franchise.
The biggest problem with Assassin's Creed is that it's story was needlessly complicated and caused the company to lose track of what fans actually wanted. The present-day storyline is absolutely unnecessary. What players really cared about was being an assassin fighting the templars. The tech in 1 adding an interesting twist, but ultimately undid the entire story. Instead of focusing on expanding the templar vs assassin story, they decided to expand on the present day story, and then the Isu story. So now we have games called "Assassin's Creed" telling us a story about people trying to survive an apocalypse by using Isu technology. The last two "assassins" weren't assassins, and the templars were largely non existant.
Ac1 - Revelations: amazing games. Ac3 - Syndicate: a bit differetn but still amazing Ac Origins - Valhalla: mid rpgs and abysmal ac games Mirage is mid but at least it feels more like an ac game
I wouldn't consider it bad just vastly different! For me the original AC games ended when the great story and storytelling took a backseat and that ended with AC IV/Rogue which were the last games that got you invested in the depth of the story, that was especially true with the Ezio trilogy which pulled the heart strings of each and every true AC fan.
Syndicate was my first AC game. Though I did not understand the overall story then, being in Victorian London caused me to stay... Long story, short: it's my favorite game because it was my first and holds up to me PLUS: the reason weapons are concealed when not in use, is due to era's weapons open carry laws at the time...
When they introduced the new combat system and stepped away from more assassin aspects of the franchise, in exhange for early 2000's level of cutscenes and voice acting. And thats being generous cuz even games cutscenes and voice acting were still better in the 2000's than their current emotionless npc shit lol
Even with the name "Assassins" in it, you lose a lot of the assassins aspect of the game in the recent ones than the old ones. But even if you removed the cincept of it being an assassins game while you play, and just try to enjoy it as a viking game, it still sucks, cuz its just padded with typical ubisoft game padding design. Where eit gives you unnecessary boring game designs of progression in order to prolong the game by 1000hrs. I HATE that
I honestly think that origins, odyssey and Valhalla have gotten a new fanbase not consisting too much of old fans, basically switched out their fanbase. Imo
Well there you go video debunked, I loved the game and enjoyed it when it released, almost 100% it. It was very fun and immersive and a diverse gameplay experience.
I explain the title in the first couple minutes of the video. I am not saying no one can like the game, and I say myself I got plenty of enjoyment from it. But, it doesn’t commit to any specific mechanics, instead opting to be a jack of all trades, master of none. It integrates stuff from both the old and new games, but watered down versions. It isn’t for RPG fans given the simplified RPG mechanics compared to Odyssey, but it would be hard to say it is for fans of the old games given how poor the cinematic finishers look. History nerds will be disappointed by the inaccurate buildings, outfits, and weapons, but it also doesn’t lean into the fantasy aspect of it either, leaving the world sparse. Many mechanics like the skill tree, the bird, social stealth, and leveling become redundant in the face of other mechanics they try to fit in that don’t mesh with one another. So when I say it is a game for no one, I really do mean it was made for no one. It wasn’t made for history fans, fantasy fans, stealth fans, combat fans, traditional AC fans, RPG fans, or anyone else specifically, because the main goal was to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. Of course I’m not saying no one can like it, that’s a nothing statement. But I am saying that no matter what you wanted from this game, Ubisoft didn’t make it with you in mind, and so your enjoyment will have to come from how much the watered down versions of the mechanics you like are enjoyable to you in Valhalla
This game has a special, yet tragic place in my gaming memories. I am an American history enthusiast so the setting of this game was so interesting. And the thought of playing as a native American was cool as shit. I was hyped beyond belief after being disappointed by Revelations, especially the Den Defense mechanic. I took the weekend off and ended up having to walk the 3 miles to GameStop after my car had died overnight. Almost immediately I was disappointed, having to play as Haytham Kenway for what felt like forever. By the time I got to Ratonhnaké:ton, I had grown to like Haytham so I was again disappointed. The combat was surprisingly shallow. I remember feeling like I was not even in control because I was just tapping Y every few seconds and watching a 5 second animation that immediately killed the enemy. It was so easy it wasn't even enjoyable. I didn't understand the Frontier, and I didn't enjoy the homestead nor any of the side content. And I HATED the battle command mechanic. But what makes it special to me is that it got me to say a sentence in complete sincerity that I never expected to ever say in my life. During the laughable Midnight Ride of Paul Revere, the horrible mechanic that was stolen from Michael Jackson's Moonwalker where your companion was pointing to your next objective rather than a map marker. Paul Revere kept giving me the WORST, most frustrating instructions, he led me right into a pit where I then yelled out: "oh way to go Paul Revere, you moron!"
Syndicate really was the beggining of the end, sure Unity was Jank but it was still a complete spectical that still hasnt been matched 10 years later lt the first game pushing the boundaries on a new console but most importantly it all still felt like an AC game not some fantasy RPG and again I enjoy a good RPG but it's not what I load an AC game for. I understand the need to innovate but I don't understand what the need to rip the spine or the DNA from the game and completely change that. Syndicate was the last I played but I've still watched playthroughs of the newer games because I like to keep up with the story.
I think another problem is the sheer volume of games they release, kinda similar to the mcu I feel like it’s incredibly over saturated which makes me not want to play new releases because I could be missing out on loads of lore while just wanting to avoid a mediocre game.
I would say Odyssey, they tried to make it fully into an RPG when that doesn't fit what Assassin's Creed is. So it taken a big step into a genre that wasn't made for AC and moved away so far from AC's roots that it became a different 'game' and didn't feel like an AC game. I'd say storywise we peaked twice, at the end of Ezio's Trilogy and AC:4 Blackflag. Mechanic wise (movement, abilities etc.) I'd say AC Unity ( after bug fixes etc.) was the peak of Assassin's Creed.
