“The RPG Trilogy Of Assassin’s Creed Sucks” 

Today marks being on RU-vid for 1 year :o

I just don’t like choosing a protagonist like in Odyssey and Valhalla to then say later that one is canon like that is just stupid at least in Origins it was one protagonist and no dialogue choices because you are following his story not yours that’s why I like mirage because of its simplicity

Origins is a good one ! Ancient Egypt, context, Bayek's story, creation of Hidden Ones... But Odyssey and Valhalla are good games, but not good Assassin's Creed !

The RPG Trilogy of Assassin's Creed Sucks. No, not you Origins, you are perfect bby.

If ubisoft hat the balls to call this new series something else, and simply continue giving us great AC and not unfinished messes we all would have been happy and lets face it the decline in sales was mostly because of unfinished and broken games, not because "people were getting sick of assassins creed." Spread the games out over 2 years and none of this would have happened

Origins is loved, many people like Odyssey too despite being not much about assassins but its history and world. Valhalla on the other hand…

I would be lying if I said I didn't enjoy RPG trilogy in past few years this trio have given me more fun than previous games

I am a Purist. I never really cared about Isu or mythology Templars vs Assasins being in historical background is what Assassins Creed really is. I honestly dont think the franchise would be so repetitive if they continued the same formula. After all there are diffrent maps,diffrent historical eras,diffrent stories,diffrent gameplay systems etc. You are right about RPG making more money tho but I hope Ubisoft use that money for a great classical AC game. I think AC Unity was great in fact almost perfect and I am playing Syndicate now(I skipped it for some reason). If people wouldnt criticize Unity from the start I dont think Ubisoft would have to go to a complete RPG direction.

I AM OF THE FIFTH KIND:-Lore Fanatic Lore Fanatics are fans who really love the stories in Assassin's Creed games. They're super into how everything connects, like the Isu, Assassins, Templars, and all the myths. They enjoy exploring the stories in all the Assassin's Creed games, no matter what type of game it is. Whether it's RPGs, platformers, or anything else, if it's got Assassin's Creed lore, they're all in. They get excited about finding hidden secrets, solving historical mysteries, and learning about the myths in the games. Basically, they're big fans of the stories in the whole Assassin's Creed universe.

People who shit on Origins have absolutely zero taste or credibility

After hearing criticism of both Valhalla and Odyssey, I was relieved to find them both very enjoyable. I agree they aren't very similar to the earlier AC games, but at this point, those older AC games seem a bit boring. Being frequently on sale for $15 helps too.

I am definitely a purist. The Isu stuff is just so convoluted and uninteresting to me. If I had my way with making an Assassin's Creed game, it would just focus on the conflict between the Assassins and Templars. I wouldn't include any Isu stuff in it at all. I wouldn't even include any modern day stuff, but that's a different topic.

Similar to action-over-horror Resident Evil 4, 5 and 6. You do it once, it's novel. Twice, it's sour. Thrice, it's gone. Also, it's quite surprising by how similar history the 2 series are. The series starts out wowing people, then Capcom & Ubisoft milked them with sequels and spinoffs which lead to the big change (RE4 and Origins) before fans started to resent the change too.

I love how you're one of the few AC creators I know of that actually seems to enjoy the whole series and in every video I just hear your enthusiasm about the series. I was actually wondering which of the 4 categories you mentioned you think you are yourself?

Can you do a video about all dlcs in Assassin's Creed? Like a ranking or you can present all the dlcs that were released for every game

Can you please tell me what is the name of the background music you are using?

I for one didn't mind Origins becoming rpg, as that one is a good game. My problem starts on Oddysey when Ubisoft mess with the lore that it becomes confusing. For example, the animus is machine that let you relive the dna memory of someone using the dna sample. How can you add choices and multiple ending when the animus isn supposed to let you only relive the memory? It's not like animus is a time machine.

I have not played Odyssey or Mirage yet, but have played Origins and Valhalla, and all mainline games before Origins. I would say that the RPG series does not give me the same Assassins Creed gameplay that the games before Origins did, and I do prefer them over the RPGs. That said; it does not make the RPGs bad in my opinion. But I don’t like the enormous amount of weapons and stuff in the RPGs and the highly bloated skill-trees. I miss the tools and slow upgrades of weapons through the story like before, or unlocking a special set through exploring and side quests. I don’t like the mythological parts with God-like monsters and “special powers”, either through the weapons or skills. The Isu technology was nice, but now it’s become quite ridiculous. I prefer a more down to earth/believable approach when it comes to the Isu relics and storyline. But I don’t hate the RPGs. They are good games overall, if not a bit bloated with silly filler content and the like. It would be preferable to go back to the style of Unity and Syndicate :)

They should of just created “ warriors of history “ having rpgs in this new game franchise and that would be really cool and if they wanted it to set in to the ac universe I guess they could but if they did that and then continue perfecting assassin creed from unity everyone would be happy. And bringing in rpg gamers to Ubisoft. if they didn’t ruin the launch of ac unity assassin creed would be very different.

I have played every AC game and although my favourite games are brotherhoood unity and black flag mirage is a really big breath of fresh air from the likes of odessey and valhalla having great stealth good parkour brilliant world decent story good side quests and tolerable combat. although combat is critisized it's actually much more realistic than the RPG counterparts as well as having satisfying finishers with diverse enemies. all in all it's a great AC game

Origins and Odyssey are good. No comment on vallhalla

man where is that origins sequel, been waiting for ages and itll probably never come :(

Of the four categories you mention, I guess I'm a casual gamer (#3)...although I do wish for a continued (not rebooted or eliminated) modern day story. (But for context, I'm way behind--on Syndicate right now.)

Suggestion: maybe you could display in the video the music track name whenever a track comes up/changes. Or maybe list them in the video description? 🤔 As you always pick superb AC music. Cheers

I was wondering why I never saw an AC video posted by Fizhy in a while. Thanks for clarifying that.

I'm somewhere between a loyalist and a purist. allow me to expound on my attitudes in detail: Altair is still my favorite protagonist and the crusades is still my favorite setting, and there are elements i like from AC1 that were given the boot with AC2, for example, while crowdblending in AC2 is more utilitarian, it changed the whole vibe. in AC1, Altair has to find a crowd of scholars dressed like him in order to crowdblend, and he pretends to be one of them. i loved this because it was ALTAIR'S experience, the reason the assassins dressed the way they did was to blend in with those specific people, Altair has to use his own cunning and has to specifically look for them or plan his strategy around where they are, etc. In AC2, Ezio picks a random group of people and then the people and ezio's cape all magically change colors. it isn't Ezio that's blending in, it's the ANIMUS hacking the memory and altering those things, like how the Tardis in Doctor Who automatically translates spoken language. it made for a smoother game mechanic but sacrificed both story and immersion. in AC1 it felt like i was using Altair's cunning to take advantage of my surroundings, starting to think like my ancestor and use HIS tactics, which perfectly aligned with how desmond was slowly learning from his ancestor's memories and also experiencing the animus' bleed-over effect, blurring the line between the memories of ancestor and descendant. as Ezio, it just felt like the Animus was helping me "cheat", it didn't feel immersive or like it was desmond or even ezio who's cunning or agency mattered, it had no greater implications, and just felt like the animus was modifying the memory for my convenience, which then begs the question of whether the memories seen in the animus can even be trusted to be correct/reliable. the animus just sort of felt like an overglorified Xbox, now. AC3 was a great game and i enjoyed connor's story, but being forced to play as the uninteresting Haytham for far too long left me feeling eternally trapped in a bad tutorial mission, and i could see the templar twist from almost right out of the gate because of how obviously templar Haytham's attitude and mannerisms were, leaving me just saying "I GET IT, he's a templar, ooooh big reveal, get on with it, when do i get to actually play THE GAME I PAYED FOR?!", and the ending was HOT GARBAGE that left such a bad taste in my mouth that i almost skipped AC4 entirely. AC4 was the best pirate game EVER, and a DECENT Assassin's Creed game, my only criticism is that the attempt to save the modern story and continue without desmond was kinda flat. it was a decent way of retconning their screw up with the AC3 ending, but it wasn't GOOD. it essentially just said "Desmond's corpse was stolen by templars and has been cut into little dna samples" and then basically just turned Abstergo into Ubisoft and made you one of Ubi's game testers, which felt a TAD bit narcissistic, and more than a little lazy, but at least sort of worked. everything between AC4 and Origins i basically have the same opinion on, decent games, just really couldn't get into the stories. i felt Rogue was weakest, thought syndicate and unity were better. everything from Origins forward was just a waste of my time, the stories didn't interest me, ubisoft starting jumping the shark, they abandoned the plots they had set up in previous installments, the RPG elements completely turned me off, the parkour engines were abysmal, basically everything that i liked about the series had been thrown out unceremoniously in favor of ill-fitting and inferior, but highly marketable trash with less and less originality with each title. Valhalla was by for the worst offender on that last point, just lifting whatever they liked from god of war 5 and the Vikings tv show right down to Eivor having Ragnar's raven tattoo and Odin dragging you around by your axe like thor uses mjolnir in GOW. AND ODIN, my god man, what happened to this series? we are first made aware of the precursor peoples and Juno in 2, and we go through the whole ezio trilogy and 3 speaking to her in the animus before we finally meet them in person at the ending of 3, and desmond just straight up DIES. now we've changed pantheons without ever actually finishing the things set up with the greeks, completely forgot about the judeo-christian angles they laid the seeds for early on, and now we're getting into slugging matches with the Allfather??? remember when they removed the crossbow from ac1 before release because of historical inaccuracy? i miss THAT Ubisoft. if they wanted to make a god of war style rpg based on the vikings tv series they should have just done that. for someone with norse heritage and an obsession with viking stuff, Ubisoft managed to do the impossible and made a viking story i absolutely could not give a rat's ass about in a viking game i'm proud NOT to own. and why are we making multiple choice decisions when reliving past events already set in stone? i've always held the general attitudes that: 1. Ubisoft shouldn't have just thrown out the seeds they laid with AC1 and the Ezio trilogy. i was deeply invested in the whole Adam and Eve angle which ubisoft were too cowardly to stay the course on, likely for fear of alienating christians, losing the demographic and baiting a drama scandal. 2. they should have actually gone somewhere with the "Greek" precursors we started with before jumping around global religions like a fresh christian convert shopping around for the right church and denomination. 3. killing desmond at the end of AC3 was a terrible choice, and if they were going to do that, it should have been the end of the franchise right there 4. ubisoft should have taken advantage of the popularity of edward kenway and black flag, and given us an Edward Kenway trilogy just like they did with ezio before him before moving on to another assassin again. Thank you for attending my TEDtalk.

Casual player here. I’ve loved Assassin’s Creed, have memorabilia and love the lore. The being said, I do have criticisms to give each title. I can honestly say I’ve replayed all entries except for Unity and Syndicate. Now regarding the RPG trilogy, I loved Origins, initially I hated Odyssey but forced myself through it grew to love it, not as an Assassin’s Creed game, but something of its own entirely, I finished Mirage which was a nice nod to the originals. I throughly enjoyed it just wished it were longer. I’m replaying Valhalla currently while waiting for June 10th for news on Red. I’m eager to see how everything affecting Ubisoft impacts the final product, but also keeping my spirited high enough to enjoy it.

I am an rpg enthusiast. I play assassin's creed 2 back in the day but I probably would neverhave come back if I hadn't seen the e3 teaser of Odyssey and how Bioware-like it was. That being said I don't think people on either side are fans of microtransactions.

I like the quality of your videos. Nice to hear your opinion on this. I'd say Origins isn't really an RPG game, but it has RPG-like combat, which is the most notable difference from it and Syndicate, except the simpler parkour (of course many new features are added in Origins and some are taken away to fit the context). When Origins released, I loved it, but when I realized, before release, that Odyssey had player choices for the story, I was put off because I wondered 'how can a game like Assassin's Creed be an RPG game', and then I realised that the franchise I love is changing it's genre and direction. Eventually, I began to like Odyssey (Valhalla had potential but it has way too much tedious, horribly written filler content which are made mandatory to finish the main story). Also, the "assassin's creed" is in every Assassin's Creed game - showing the unique code and mentality of each killer, each protagonist, and their purpose in the overall narrative. That's an assassin's creed. Assassins can exist without Brotherhoods. Odyssey focuses on the wider world of Assassin's Creed, we can say.

Me personally, the reason I don’t care for RPG elements jn games like AC is because, im one to follow the story for how it is suppose to be told. I don’t want to choose the outcome, I want to immerse myself into the game in the way it was meant to be told, as there’s always been one protagonist, and there’s always been one outcome, and I want to continue to experience the outcome and connectivity between the games as they are suppose to be intended. Also, the overwhelming choices in customization is a bit ridiculous. I’ve played more hours in Diablo 2 that I can remember at this point, then trying Diablo 4 where EVERYTHING is customizable, down to the make up and even choosing specific stats to boost the builds…it made the grind I loved to find the gear I needed feel absolutely pointless. I don’t care about “this gives 1.35% for X seconds” none sense, just give me short, sweet, and to the point choices so I spend more time actually playing over needing to “look cool” or do math to min/max by build. Also, level capping is dumb if you have open world, because it makes the very aspect for there to be open world go from fun to feeling/being mandatory: exploration. I don’t want to be told that I have to explore and grind to level up my player/gear to advance, because then it turns into curiously and excitement, into being a chore and ruining the fun entirely. If you have a level capped open world, all you’re doing is essentially making a linear game, which goes against the concept of open world, so either fully commit to the open world concept and remove any level caps, or just make a non open world game with a linear path/story to follow, you can’t have both, and you won’t please any fan base with making a counter productive game with a leveling system that caps out when you explore the open world…which is what you’re suppose to do in an open world. Lastly, the greed from Ubisoft has become blatantly apparent, and that is a very biasing factor. I understand your statement in “they have made some good games recently”, however, that doesn’t discredit the point that those “good games” are so very few and far between. Mirage was an enjoyable game, it was my first introduction to AC as far as playing a game in the series, and now going back and playing the games in order starting with AC1 I understand the criticism as it was a DLC made into a full game, but overall, it actually feels more AC than any of the RPG games, both in combat and immersion within the story. AC1 Had basic combat, Mirage does too, and that’s one of the biggest criticisms and AC1 is a very highly regarded game by many. For Ubisoft to outright say they want to place the burden onto players will never make the idea of them making good games recently justified to glance over saying the “quiet part” out loud. Also, their involvement with forced DEI agenda/narrative pushing companies like Sweet Baby Inc sours expectations with any future games, as they would rather bend the knee to the vocal minority who demand DEI/identity politics to be the forefront of the games, and once everything is said and done, all those demanding change never were going to truly support it, so it leaves actual fans with bad games all for the sake of chasing pennies while losing dollars. If you were interested in such a topic, I which I talk a LOT about AC, make sure to check the video out here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-xw-biPeUkz0.html I’m not just trying to plug my video because of views or anything like that, but because of all the DEI none sense that’s been surfacing, it is a conversation that studios, and the consulting companies they work for, are now being forced to address, many of which are desperately trying to run damage control about, and it leaves people questioning if what they were doing was the “right thing”, why would they need to run damage control for it?

I honestly feel if Ubisoft named the game Valhalla not “assassin creed Valhalla” it won’t get this much criticism from the fans. I remember being the only one that liked unity during its release among my friends and school now every one likes it like be for real and open your mind to change

I don’t think rpg elements are the elements (actually, I love Origins) The problems is the amount of magic/fantasy/mythology presence in the story as well as in the gameplay and lack of the classic assassins vs templars, add to that a worse parkour system and less effective stealth that encourages you to do open combat instead of seeing it as a last resort And I am a purist

Can you do a video where you rate every soundtrack of ac?

I didn’t have an issue with any of the AC RPG games. Personally, I enjoyed all three of them.

I’ve been playing the series since the original. I had a lot of fun with the RPG trilogy and enjoyed my time with them. However I did get a bit burnt out due to the length. Odyssey took me over a year to finish and it was the only game I was playing (this was back when I had a 3 hour daily commute). I finished the main campaign of Valhalla a year ago and haven’t been able to pick it up again, I still have the dlc and extras to do. They are fun, but a bit too bloated.

I loved origins and odyssey. I’ve played this series since it started. Still haven’t gotten around to Valhalla or mirage

tbh i understand where ppl are coming from when it comes to the classic style of ac games, but having a big enough map where we have multiple cities was just a game changer. i love espionage (which let’s face it assassination is somewhat associated with spy stuff) it just elevated the gameplay for me at least. especially with ac Valhalla, although the cities were not exactly what i would have wanted. all that game needed was bigger cities. the distrust areas with the added pressure of the zealots roaming around was just too goddam fun for me. absolutely fire. plus the order members were hidden scattered around and you had to geo-locate them yourself (at least i did) just added to all of it. as it’s called irl “find, fix, finish”. i literally bought mirage played most of it and got bored of it and switched back to ac Valhalla because i did all the work my self regarding finding the order members, although the notoriety system from mirage was the best part of the game we need that moving forward. anyways if i knew where the person was but didn’t know their identity i would go to said place on the map and try to find them myself without all of the hints, it was incredibly fun for me. so whatever Ubisoft comes up with i hope they keep these four qualities: hidden order members, elite warriors that track you, multiple big cities (at least two), and the notoriety system (or the wanted levels for you gta fans lmaooo). i think they can’t go wrong with these features in ac games moving forward.

Thanks for this video Hidden One I love your AC content hope you keep it up and good work also can't wait for your coverage on AC Red

The only RPG I have an issue with is Valhalla because I think it’s just too much game and the live service didn’t work well with this series. Origins is a solid title that I’ve played multiple times and still enjoy. I do wish that they would’ve delved more into the actual creed because that was a huge focal point of lore in the first 6 games in the series. Odyssey is a fantastic game. I think it was genuinely fun to play. I think if Ubisoft would’ve stuck with the initial name of “Odyssey: an Assassins Creed Story” oddly enough people would’ve probably had less of an issue with it not having much lore outside of the Isu stuff. As a bigger fan of the older games in the franchise, I can see why old school fans dislike the RPGs. Removing the advanced parkour and the focus of the creed completely changed the identity of the series. Arguably Ubisoft chose to go in a direction that appealed to a larger fan base and better supported microtransactions. For the fans who spent their money on the first 9 games in the series, I can see why they would be upset by the series completely changing direction.

If ubisoft didn't change the formula after ac syndicate and if they kept on sticking to the same formula, this franchise would have gotten the farcry treatment saying its the same thing over again and again with a different map and setting

I'm one of those who loved all three, I really enjoyed the large open world and the stories. I went back to playing the old ACs but they felt really old now, same feeling I had playing Mirage as well

Although I study Ancient Greece, for some reason I cannot explain, my favourite game is AC Valhalla. It is my favourite game of all time alongside Ghost of Tsushima and RDR2. Odyssey is my 3rd favourite AC game after Mirage, and Origins is tied for 4th with Black Flag

I really like Origins. Bayek is a strong contender for best protagonist in the series. I'd put him on the same pedestal as Ezio. The game is gorgeous and there's tons of little details to appreciate with Bayek's interaction with the environment. I also adore parts of Odyssey. I got 200 hours of playtime before even hitting the credits. The sense of exploration, the bite-sized story telling for regional side quests, and the RPG mechanics were all a blast to play around with. I played Valhalla... It was a game. The thing about the RPG games isn't that they have nothing to offer. It's that they remove so much of what matters to me when it comes to Assassin's Creed. Parkour became an afterthought. Mechanics were disincentivized for loot grinding, abilities on cooldown and stat sheets. This is already noticeable in Syndicate, which I would argue is the better starting point for the RPG games than Origins is. I also didn't care for Syndicate for much the same reasons as the games that came after; it just felt like a Ubisoft game, rather than Assassin's Creed. Like a Watch_Dogs situation; games that take place in the same universe, without sharing a core design philosophy.

I'm a proud purist, but I'd love for ubi to release both rpg type ac games and the more traditional type (but modernized to be in line with more recent open world games).

I have good faith in Ubisoft they’ll make ac red a good game!

My thoughts on Shadows (Red) will be determined by the cinematic premiering in less than 2 hours

I'd say I'm somewhere in between RPG enthusiast and Casual Player. I've played a decent chunk of the AC games (2, 3, 4, Unity, Syndicate, all three RPG games, and Mirage), but I've only finished Valhalla and Unity so far. Part of that is because I just don't have all that much time anymore, but a big part of that is that those two games, despite being considered some of the worst in the series at one point or another, were the games I legitimately enjoyed. I'm not a big fan of the modern day plots (although I haven't played enough of AC2 or 3 to get enough of the Desmond arc to form my opinion), and both Unity and Valhalla feel like the most refined versions of similar previous games.

the only bad thing about Origins was when I was FORCED to play as Aya. I just wanted to go back to Bayek and do open world stuff, but had to just finish the aya sections already.

I‘m type 5: The Overarching story guy I‘m mainly interested in the connections between the games and, of course, the present day story bits

I consider myself a "sort of" purist. I don't hate the RPG Trilogy, Origins is in my top 3 of favorite AC games, but I will always like the old style more than the RPG style. Every time I play the Ezio Trilogy or Black Flag I get so nostalgic for the gameplay.

Tbh i don't mind the switch of genres. I played action rpg games for some time so it's not a big loss to me For me the best thing in this series is being able to explore different historical settings. I don't care about if game focuses on stealth or not. Just gimme that sweet sweet virtual historical tourism Edit: oh yeah i am more of a casual player

As a fan of Role Playing Games, I personally like them. However, Odyssey and Valhalla made you feel as if your choices not only don't really matter but, it messes up on how it basically doesn't let you continue the story that you started with the characters that you loved Playing as. Now, I also love how the series did do something different with historical events while teaching us on what happened as well. But, when I play an R.P.G., I want to be able to continue my save file over to the next game and feel like I am still telling my story. The fact that Kassandra and female Eivor have became designated as the "Canon" characters, it makes me feel as if I don't have a choice not only on who I play as but I basically have to submit myself to spoilers to understand what events are "Canon" in the games and the franchise as a whole. But, I do still respect the fact that they did try so,thing different on the Mythologies of Ancient Egypt, Greece and Scandinavia plus the United Kingdom.

I would say I am more of The Casual Player. My first game in the franchise ever that I played was Rogue. Then from there Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla. Then I got into Unity, Syndicate, and Black Flag. So for me I’m just a fan of the franchise but I do like the current style of RPG ones particularly in Odyssey and Origins cause of Ancient Egypt and Greece.

I’m getting odyssey tomorrow which is the first of the RPG style ones I will have played.

I am a "fan" of the series ever since it was called Prince of Persia, and it was 2D... and pretty much monochrome, and i was a little boy younger than my now son, just as a context. My 2 cents is that every new installment added it's own weight to the legacy; i think it matters how old you were when you played the games, how long the games were out since you got to play them, what your personal preferences are with regards to places you like to see/visit. and so on. I for one am grateful that this series endured in one form or another for so long, and despite my personal bias at one point or another, i did and will play every assassin's creed game that comes out for as long as they can keep pushing them. It is very rare for a franchise to last this long and bring us on amazing journeys. Maybe Valhalla or AC3 or Unity is not your cup of tea at this moment, but who knows ... maybe in a year or two you will be in a different spot in your life and pour hundreds of hours in one of them.

I really disliked about the newer games that everything is too much. I have a family and wanna have fun with games, not just search for collectibles for 100 hours. Origins had a lot of great storys to tell. But Valhalla . . .

I just started replaying origins and I'm hooked. I honestly don't know why I didn't like it when I played it years ago. I played for two hours and then uninstalled it and forgot about it. Maybe because I was expecting it to be more similar to Unity or Syndicate and not an RPG game. But I hoped into it now with the right expectations, and it's an awesome game, reminds me a lot of The Witcher 3

I'm a 5th type - Stealth Addict. I love the AC games for their stealth and will force being stealthy wether its an RPG or a dating sim lol.

Love the RPG tribology. Valhalla get's a little monotonous at times but I still really liked it. Odyssey just flows and the fight animations are the best. Origins has my favorite protagonist by far out of all AC games. Granted I haven't played AC3, Rogue & AC4 yet.

I'm playing AC Odyssey right now, had a mixed expectation for the game, and damn, I'm definitely loving it! Seriously, I love the old games, specially Brotherhood, 2 and Black Flag (haven't played 3, Unity or Syndicate yet), but for now Odyssey is being at least top 3 on my list

AC origins was an AC game, Odyssey was a slug to get through and Valhalla was a Viking game, not that a Viking is is bad but it wasn't an AC game to me

Gameplay wise, the shift to RPG made sense and was not that hated with Origins, as Origins and its DLCs perfectly balanced the new setting and gameplay with the experience of being an assassin. The simplest explanation is the hidden blade itself. After all the stealth you do inside a fort to reach a target or a soldier, and then your hidden blade rewards your sneaky tactics with a confirmed hidden blade kill. This was offset with the Phylakitai being immune to hidden blade one shot kills, but dealing a heavy damage for you being sneaky, and still had to have a boss fight to win. Odyssey removed this for even the minion soldiers, they all became damage sponges and the game became button mashing after the initial few bursts of skill attacks. Origins Pharaohs DLC is all about weird locations and boss fights, and it felt in-lore. You literally entered the afterlife to confront them, you knew this is not the real world anymore, this is some fantastical side. Hidden Ones DLC felt more grounded and a great expansion of the main story. It would've been nice if we got a dual protagonist game after Origins where you played as both Aya and Bayek in the respective regions of Ancient Rome and North Africa-Sinai Peninsula, and they form the next 2 Tenets of the creed, after them realising the first one, stay your blade from the flesh of the innocent. The RPG element is a welcome, it's great, the combat felt more reactive and engaging than before, unlike especially in Ezio games where it was just counter kills and chain kills. Ezio Games combat made you feel like you were OP, but now you have to be more dynamic with your fights. But the core tenets of what Assassin's Creed means is what has been missing.

I played almost all of the games (i think Black Flag, Unity and Mirage are missing up until now) and i enjoy the RPG trilogy most, because i’m an rpg fan and also i’m in love with greek and norse mythology, egyiptian and roman history as well. However a mercenary who is at the end of the game is the most famous warrior in the greek world, or a viking who participates in defeating basically every kingdom in England and becames the most feared viking kinda rejects the whole idea of an assassin, who should be hidden in the shadows. Not to mention Kassandra and Eivor (especially Kassandra) became kinda OP. For these reasons i understand some of the criticisms. But Odyessy will forever be my favorite game.

Odyssey gives great freedom of gameplay that older titles dont give. Actually you can choose to play stealthy like in older games if you go with an assassin build(with good engravings of course). Been fan of older titles too. Story-wise they are better but osyssey has great gameplay value. First few hours until.you come up with a good build and nice engravings can be bit frustrating and overwhelming.but once you get going it is fun as as hell

I like Origins played out of it for a thousand hours. but when it comes to odyssey and valhall, I say that valhalla should be just another IP. it just doesn't belong. Wherein, Odyssey, oh come on....

I'm somewhat open minded with code Red, I won't buy it but if it's good I'll give it a chance. I'm excited for the Rouge Prince of Persia, Prince of Persia x Dead Cells pretty much And I'm in the middle of a purest and casual AC fan. Liked all but Odyssey and Valhalla, I've played both.

I guess my main problem with the RPG games is it has divided the audience into different factions and therefore an AC game will never hit the heights of the earlier games because a faction of the audience will always be alienated and less likely to buy or enjoy the game. Odyssey alienates fans who want the assassin fantasy and Mirage alienates the RPG fans. They seem to be taking their time with Hexe and Red, so hopefully they're taking in all the fans thoughts, praise, criticism on the series and 1 or both of the next games leave most fans satisfied.

I would say im a Purist, but i like the isu and the animus stuff. That's all plenty cool and adds to the sci fi-fantasy aspect it's always had. I do yearn for the original storytelling, but I've put plenty of time into the new rpg games, with valhalla being my least favorite of them.

I am part of The RPG Enthusiasts. I played the first two AC games back on the 360 and didn’t enjoy them. When I played Origins I fell in love with that game and put over 100 hours into it. The RPG AC games are my favorite. I’m looking forward to AC Shadows.

I wouldn't say I'm a purist. I enjoy the RPG games and what they've introduced from the vast world's amazing combat and isu storyline but I don't like how the focus on stealth gameplay was abandoned that and worse parkour if they can merge that into the RPG setting whilst also including more assassins/templars I'd be cool with it

I feel if Ubisoft never changed the formula, but instead delayed the time between games to resllt polish them even more, that would've stopped fans from saying it went stale. During that period when they were releasing a new game every year, the franchise began to feel like FIFA. But none of the actual games were bad. Buggy sure....bad...no. Having a 1 year gap between games would allow them to polish the game up more and make it even better and plus it gives fans a break so they don't constantly have a new game each year and actually have an extra year to really appreciate it. Tbh Ubisoft could still go back to the original formula and implement this method

I don't mind map size... I just dislike the health aspect of certain enemies. The combat from the older ones was better in my opinion

I like both of them and i do have fun playing them but i dont like the rpg style for a ac franchise. As when i think of ac i think of assassin brotherhood,stealth and what type of root i should take to complete the mission. As the rpg you can run kill complete and there isn't alot of stelth as well i think the old one's have way better story when i go though the rpgs i don't care if i skip the cut scenes after a while as it feel dragged out the story. If the rpg Valhalla odyssey dlc type thing and wasn't part of main story i think i would like it better (this is just my opinion)

This is the first I've heard about Red's budget. That gives me some hope. I just hope the writing is good

I would classify the RPG ACs as lazy. Enemy difficulty being reduced to simply a number, whereas in old ACs such as 2 the more difficult enemies and bosses just fought better (dodged and countered more). The combat is simple hack 'n slash and fast dodges, not like the slower more weighted combat of older ACS, for example the counter window differed depending on the type of weapon the enemy had. You could disarm, be disarmed, grab and throw...really the fighting was more interesting in the older ACs. They had some historical accuracy to them as well, where as now you get God weapons with glowing lights and stupid stuff. They're just Whicher clones really and play just like that or God of War. AC is not unique or that interesting anymore. The only positive addition from the RPG era is ranged weapons. Bayek I think is a good character also. Overall I like Origins but I can admit the RPG era is objectively worse. And no I'm not a Black Flag fanboy. While a lot of fun it is a terrible AC game in it's own way - the combat is simply just press 2 buttons and you can wipe out an entire platoon. Plus the game gives you dual swords and pistols from within the first few hours of gameplay - you are completely overpowered from the beginning. Unity was a return to form but it's brilliance was overshadowed by it's bugs. The franchise was not growing stale as Unity's popularity proves, and the shift to RPG was not inevitable. If the franchise just continued on from Unity (smoothing out it's mechanics with minimal bugs), keeping to a more grounded world with emphasis on assassins and complex combat, but created a world which allowed the vast exploration of Black Flag, the franchise would still be loved. This base formula would keep the franchise going, and it would be the locations and stories which would keep each game fresh.

I’m so excited for AC Red. Japanese history fascinates me and I’d love to see what Ubisoft does with it.

İ witnessed the launch of first AC and started with it and genuinely think all the games except valhalla are pretty good in their own right. Not disappointed with any of them really. The yearly fatigue was real tho so i hope they never do yearly again. Around 3 years would be ok with me.

I think a game like assassin creed unity or syndicate would be a good template for other RPG games. I mostly play AC Games just for the storyline because i like the storylines.

I had my issues with valhalla on the beginning.. but after 4hrs in it made fun.. im probably a nbr3. And yes i cant wait for new ac

I was surprised how much I liked Origins, that being said Odyssey was waaayy too different and they clearly wanted to move away from the creed which set off the fanbase lol So Valhalla course corrected a bit but not out of the RPG stuff, I just want Red tbh its what I have wanted for years Also, can someone explain this to me, The Japanese one is being done by Anvil right? Which team is working on that Salem Witch Trials one?

Several thoughts during this video. Great video. I would say I am #5. I am playing through the entire series and interested in all the stories but have some aspects of #3. Like I said I am playing through the WHOLE series and it's been a ride. I originally started with Odyssey but found the modern day timeline story would be confusing so I started with ACI. Side note: That first hour or so that I played with AC Odyssey was the most fun I have had with game in a long time. Currently at Syndicate and counting the days till I get back to at the very least Origins and than Odyssey. Anyway The Hidden One encapsulates every single thing I have thought about the series when he said "it had to evolve". I am going through the entire series analyzing everything possible (not the multiplayer because I hate multiplayer) and yes this series HAD to evolve. So much good was in Rogue but because it was carbon copy of Black Flag I just blazed through the main story. So yeah that subset of gameplay burnt itself out really quick. Second Unity arguably goes back to the Ezio days even in terms of story and especially gameplay. This was boring and like trying to back home again (which frankly doesn't work). Syndicate on other hand does enough different (at least so far currently in Sequence 4 just finished Cable News) at least to me make it stand out. Now I grant you they could have had another game like Syndicate but I feel it would be another Rogue situation where enough wouldn't/couldn't be done to distinguish it. Even if it would that formula would get old too. Ubisoft had no other choice but what they did or risk becoming COD or BF. Thing is with an RPG you can always change just slightly to make it feel vastly different, Heck look at Final Fantasy (the older ones the turn based ones). Granted this an ARPG but my point still stands. The honest truth is people don't know what they want. Even when they get what they THINK they want it's never as great as your mind has built it up to be or how you remembered it from before. Our memories also tend to edit out the bad. I am so burnt out on the "optional" objectives I might just skip Mirage because they make a return. It will be so refreshing when I get to the RPG to not have those hanging on to me like a hidden blade at my back. Lastly of course in LORE having a different style make sense. The further back you go in history fighting styles change. The RPG series go way back before Altair/Ezio's day ie before those tactics were even thought of. Several games have pointed out especially with Achilles that the assassins are always playing catch up because they won't adapt and still using the old tactics. Elise even tells Ano this in Unity. So yes both in LORE and in the real world the games HAD to change. The one thing I could have seen which might have been a compromise at least in terms of story would have been to have Kassandra be either a Sage/ an Isu that escaped the calamity etc. That MIGHT have taken the sting out for fans or at least been a bit of fan service. Sorry for going on like this but this has been building since last year and I needed to share my thoughts. Also you got a SUB.

Bro got a very very loyal audience I have seen youtubers get 2 million views with 40 million subscribers Bro consistently gets 30 to 25k views

Origins, Odyssey & Valhalla are 50/50 with people. Some like them, others don’t. Just a matter of preference. And I’m a casual player with all 13 games (plus Liberations & the 3 Chronicles).

I'm a casual player. I liked both RPG and older games. I quite like the complex storyline with new RPG games. I think they should release both RPG games and an Old style games. I think ubisoft did a good tactical move switching to RPG. I think codename red and hexe will be a huge opportunity to ubisoft and the AC universe. Bringing back the Creed and brotherhood back to games will be turning point. They covered Creed's past and now time for future 😇

I personally would like to see a game that returns to the classic button layout

My issue with the RPG games is that it essentially has the same issues as previous AC games: too repetitive missions, the open world - while impressive - often feels copy-pasted, combat is functional but shallow, same goes for stealth and the story also is all over the place and varies from game to game imho. However, whereas pre-Origins AC games were 20 hour affairs and I was able to see past these little grievances I had with it, with a 60 or 80 or more hour game, these grievances became downright dealbreakers and unbearable. This is also compounded by the fact that I have more responsibility at work and in my private life and therefore less time for games (and honestly, I've also discovered other things that at the moment just feel more rewarding to me, e.g. reading about real history beats currently playing through a mostly accurate but still also fictionalized recreation of it). The reason why The Witcher 3 still works is because the world feels very personal very handcrafted whereas AC's recent games feel oddly lifeless to me. And the gameplay gets tedious rather quick. Now, I still think these are impressive creations and I'm happy so many people still enjoy them, but they are not my cup of tea anymore.

I was a Casual but lately ive played the Ezio Trilogy and rn im on AC 3, ive already downloaded Black Flag, Rouge and Unity, honestly now im a Purist I can say? Idk im not an RPG person, actually my first AC was Odyssey💀 this year, and I was bored after 1 or 2 hrs of play, I love the story before RPG, I mean we had gods and all that end of the world stuff, The saga wasnt "serious" at all like many people are saying, but then with the gods and Reincarnation of Eivor and Basim it was like wtf? Its like Ubisoft made the Riverdale TV show effect😭Idk thats My op

I'm none of these four. I'm a veteran AC player who likes RPG games, as well as the OGs. Simple as that.

11:21 what is the Work place drama video game about?...

Something I just realized is that we havent had a double hidden bladed Assassin since Black Flag

Im doing the opposite of the alt right, and the reason why people hate the 2 groups crossing in the avatar show episode, and seeing why people dont like it.

My biggest issue with Odyssey and Valhalla is that it kinda just feels like they're using the AC IP to sell these games that barely have anything to do with the franchise. If they wanted to make these games and set them in a different universe then I wouldn't have an issue.

tbh if those rpg triolgy games where not an assassin creed game and was realeased as different franchise it would have got more attention but here the thing is assassin creed game are supposed to be stealthy with parkours and different oppurtunities for stealth but they just put it like an rpg game. in games like origin,odyssey and valhalla i like those games but realizing that its an assassin creed game makes your prespective so different towards it.

Definitely fall into the purists category as Unity is my favorite and ACs peak. Not the biggest fan of Valhalla or Odyssey. Those two fell off for me but Origins always seems enjoyable to go back to and play. Mirages updates make it worth replaying. Recently replayed Syndicate, the no jump button still drives me nuts

The RPG era of Assassin’s Creed seems even better to me than the first three numbered games. Not to mention Unity and Syndicate. The problem is that people are afraid of evolving, and the same happens with the Final Fantasy saga. You can’t stick to the same style for decades; you have to embrace evolution and new ideas. Origins and Odyssey are great video games; Valhalla isn’t to my taste. Nostalgia heavily influences people’s thinking. Unity is known for its good parkour, but nobody remembers its terrible narrative and its protagonist lacking personality. Even its villain isn’t memorable.

I'm more of a casual AC player, but I care about the lore. I think the RPG games wouldn't have received nearly as much hate if the main characters were simply assassins within the creed, cause the argument is almost always that they're not bad games, just bad AC games. I don't fully agree with this sentiment though, because I don't mind that the stories in these games function as prequels that depict the way in which (the conflict between) the Creed and Templars came to be, while also providing more insight on the Isu and all that. I actually really enjoy these games, both in terms of gameplay and story (Valhalla not as much). But in each one there's just something missing in the general gameplay loop, which they actually have in common with the older AC games imo. You kind of mentioned it in the video already, but really...the side activities, open world exploration etc are practically identical in each game, including the RPGs. So I do think that the RPGs are in many ways an improvement and natural evolution of the older games. And yet they're also a clear downgrade in terms of parkour, modern day story, having a single overarching canon story/ancestor etc, all of which are principal parts of the AC lore and what makes this franchise different from any other one out there. Generally I've noticed that these types of open world RPGs (regardless of the franchise/developers) are too repetitive and tedious, and have seen very little improvement or even any change at all in years now. Just about every game within the genre is basically just more of the same, but with a different skin. They lack innovation and creativity and because of it come across as mediocre/average games (the only exception within the AC franchise being Black Flag imo, I finally played it last year and have already replayed it, love that game to bits). That's what needs to change. I'm cautiously looking forward to AC Red though, I like what I've been hearing about it so far. Hopefully they finally improve the formula with this one.

I think ac valhalla is a great game. I mean you can choose to be a assassin if you have certain skills such as assassination of higher level enemies skill etc. Also i think they should improve their next games on valhalla but make it more 'creed vs order' story line

I dont have a problem with the rpg style at all. Origins is one of my favorites in the series. With odyssey and valhalla, there are other aspects that ruin the games for me. In oddysey, not being able to one hit stealth kill on certain guards no matter what is really annoying. With valhalla, the detection system is an abomination and literally never works properly. However, I still think all of them are overall good games

I strongly dislike RPGs in general. I hate having to compare overly complex stats of weapons, look at "percentages of critical hit chances", armour stats, buffs, ... Conversely, I like stealth games. Any of the older AC games that wouldn't force you into open combat, I would try to complete not only without being detected, but without even being spotted. On top of that, I liked the style of the older combat, where you could actually see swords make contact, your character hit an enemy and them flinching, ... The whole hitbox thing is a major step back in my eye. When it comes to AC, I also like historical accuracy, and the "historical tourism" factor. I would much rather have a highly detailed historical metropolis to explore than a huge map containing some settlements only connected by non-descript landscape where "anything goes" for the developers. Don't give me some fictitious islands on a disproportionate map of Greece. Give me a 1:1 map of Paris where as many of the recorded buildings that would have been there at the time actually show up on the map. And definitely don't give me minotaurs, cyclopses, ... to fight. AC was always a fairly realistic series with some scifi sprinkeled in, usually making an appearance at the end. It was never a fantasy series. Finally, respect the lore. The animus contains a representation of the memories of ancestors. You can only relive these memories, you can't influence history. That means one single ending, no dialogue options and no choice of gender or protagonist. For all these reasons and more, I despise the AC RPG games with a passion.

A big franchise game like assassins creed should develop over time. You can not expect AC games have to be about stealth, parkour, hidden blade and templars for 17 years? And btw, Ubisoft never described how an assassins creed game should be like.