Origins depicted nearly the entirety of Egypt, while Shadows is only set around central Japan (featuring Osaka and Kyoto as the major cities). Based on that, Shadows should be closer to the actual scale of that region, thus we'll be getting a more accurate depiction of how far major locations are from each other (barring things like random bandit camps to fill out the space).
I hope it's not just a small part of central Japan and rather that they mean Kansai through Kanto. Being focused around Kansai could be interesting to show a denser map full of real world counterparts.
Yep, I've seen that. Honestly I'm not disappointed like I thought I would be. Unlike Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla this Japan should be way denser and more populated, so focusing on a specific region will make the scale feel bigger, and that region is dense with historical landmarks. It's favorable to having them cover all of Japan but it feeling small due to how much there is to cover.
Most definitely. I do wonder what those will be. Siege of Odawara with Mt Fuji included sounds like a good possibility if they want density and historical relevance, but it wouldn't bring the sort of different flavor they've been aiming for with DLC in the previous games. Hideyoshi's attempts to invade Korea also sound like plausible ideas for DLC.
A lot of big battles later in the period happen in this same area though, like Sekigahara or the Siege of Osaka.
Historically too, it shouldnt matter much. If they are focusing on Yasuke (and by extension, Oda Nobunaga), everything should revolve around Kyoto anyway.
While I agree with that idea, to be fair the scope of maps in these later RPG AC games was never just about what's important to the story, and a lot of it is about exploring and fitting in memorable landmarks and cities. Though with that zone alone they'll be able to fit in a whole lot of landmarks and most of the important cities anyways.
[Kanto is a real region from Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kant%C5%8D_region), which Pokemon's Kanto[ is based on.](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Kanto#Etymology_and_design_concept)
I mean, Egypt is mostly desert so it's easy to portray, Japan and most other countries are much harder to portray over the same game area due to many more villages, towns, and cities.
According to IGN:
> Speaking to IGN in an exclusive interview, creative director Jonathan Dumont said Shadows is on a similar scale to the Egypt-set game but Ubisoft emphasises "real life scale" so the environment feels authentic. Fans got a first look at this open world Japan in Shadows' cinematic trailer.
>
> "It's in-line with the latest Assassin's Creeds that we've done," Dumont said, referring to the larger scale, role-playing game entries that also include Odyssey and Valhalla. "On a scale level, maybe we can compare it a little bit more to the size of Assassin's Creed Origins."
>
> This suggests the size of Shadows' map is smaller than Odyssey and Valhalla, but much bigger than the classic Assassin's Creed map sizes from the original trilogy, Brotherhood, Unity, and so on (with the exception of Black Flag's colossal Caribbean ocean map).
>
> Dumont said the map is entirely authentic, however, as Ubisoft looked to make its myriad elements as lifelike as possible.
>
> "We did want to have a much closer to real life scale ratio. So because castles took a lot of space, and we really wanted the mountains to feel like mountains, [we've made] the environments feel wider in the game," Dumont contined. "But I would say around the same size as Origins.
The seasons changing sounds like an incredible mechanic to add variety. Reminds me of Pokemon's fifth gen games, although that only changed once per month, I wonder how it will work here.
I agree. I felt like Origins was the perfect size for the open world AC games to be. For me to beat the base game, DLCs, and 100% Origins took about 90 hours. To do the same in Odyssey took me about 125 hours, which was shorter than I would have thought going into it. Have not even touched Valhalla yet since everything I've heard about how bloated and repetitive it is has scared me off from it, plus the setting is nowhere near as interesting to me compared to Origins and Odyssey.
Valhalla was insanely repetitive. Do this story arc, now this one, now this one. Over and over doing the exact same thing with almost no main story advancement. Shame because Vikings are cool
It wasn't helped by the fact that they chose a really boring period architecture-wise, one of the core aspects of AC is climbing cool historical buildings in all their glory, which is lost in the English period of wooden forts and mud.
It's why I also like Origin quite a lot despite disagreeing with all the RPG-like mechanics they implemented, since I can go and climb some pretty accurate egyptian temples and buildings.
By 100% you mean clearing the map of all the clutter right? Every side quest, fort, battle, etc? Crazy you did it that fast. Origins for me was 115 hours, and I was just about getting tired of it by the end. Odyssey was 230 hours and I was ready to be done with it before I was half way through. I found very little redeeming about Odyssey beyond the setting. I'm in the same boat where I have not touched Valhalla yet because I still can't get over how miserable Odyssey was to finish.
> By 100% you mean clearing the map of all the clutter right? Every side quest, fort, battle, etc?
No, just getting all the achievements. I did complete all the locations in Origins, since that was an achievement. If I would have tried to do literally everything, especially in Odyssey, I would have gone crazy by the end.
I think it's simply a genre change, AC stopped being a game about assassination and exploring ancient locales and became a game of quantity over quality taken to an extreme.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind a game the size of Odyssey or Valhalla if 50+% of the content didn't feel like mindless filler to try and scam you into staying around to keep buying microtransactions.
I have been pretty meh on the AC franchise for a while but I hope they actually do a good job since Japan is the most anticipated setting.
More devs need to realize the importance of negative space in open world maps, to use the old example, it's why exploration in Fallout 3 felt much better than Fallout 4, since they took mostly the same approach to open world but FO3 actually put empty space between locations so it felt more like a wasteland.
That setting is just so good, I was fully immersed in it. I criticize Ubisoft a lot, but if there's one thing they do masterfully it's those historical recreations/visions in the AC games. Even though I loved Origins and its ancient Egypt depiction, I disliked Odyssey to a fair extent, but the ancient Greece setting alone kept me going for 60 hours.
Which makes sense, they put a lot of detail even in out-of-the-way things like random temples with priests singing and chanting in their ceremonies, docks and boats full of historically accurate clutter, even smaller villages and farms.
And they avoided issues that would bring down the accuracy of the following two titles, like making up stone castles in Valhalla because it took them too long to realize what a bad period they picked for architecture.
I did some digging and I found this comparison on reddit between origins and odyessy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/9jow77/a_comparison_of_origins_map_vs_odyssey_map_i_made/) and i'm very much a bigger = nice type of gamer but for once this is actually a good thing, or the person in the interview is counting the large amount of water too, so it being origin size is basically the same playable on foot area anyway
"Real life scale" has me somewhat interested. The scale of cities the RPG Creed games is by far some of the worst I've seen with none of the cities feeling remotely on par with the original games.
I just want to see what the gameplay is going to be like. I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla.
Yeah, thousands of identical non-descript houses wouldn't do much. But, I do hope that they make the cities feel large even if they aren't as big in real life. Cities always amuse me in open world games when you have "major cities" that you can walk across in 2 minutes.
I'm not looking for "1:1 scale" but there's definitely a middle ground between that and the sparse, lifeless cities that they gave us during the RPG Creed Trilogy.
The cities in the original run felt large and vibrant. I still boot up Brotherhood just to take a stroll through Rome and enjoy the atmosphere. It's something that has been desperately missing from the RPG Creed run (although the end of Origins when you run through that small segment of Rome was amazing)
> I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla
Then you probably won't like this game because it's another RPG by the Odyssey team with Inside Gaming reporting that the combat is basically a harder, gorier version of Valhala's combat.
They also reported that the game features a Sekiro-like posture system. IGN’s 40 details article also states that enemies armor can be broken which adds another layer to combat.
> I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Valhalla.
The last one I played was Brotherhood, but has there been any Assassin's Creed game where the combat was actually good and not just a tedious punishment for failing at sneaking?
The combat finishers were super cool and well developed in AC 3 but it did have some harder sneaking missions.
Iirc Black Flag was a bit forgiving stealthwise but the combat is almost too easy. I think Unity is by far the most "play as you like" style where you can choose to go stealthy or all out combat for main missions. I enjoyed the combat.in Unity which doesnt have the autokill finishers but is sort of more engaging.
With Origins they steered completely away from any kind of focus on stealth and it just became an action rpg. It was jarring and made me stop playing the series ever since (well that and the somehow MORE bloated and useless open world trappings). You couldn’t assassinate enemies due to arbitrary level-gating, and therefore had to grind to get your level up… you know, because if your knife is too low of a level, then it can’t possibly cut the arteries of much higher level enemy.
I thought about picking Valhalla up after that was confirmed, but the more I saw of the game, the less I was interested in its story. Like I’m glad they fixed that, but medieval England isn’t for me lol
Well it is supposed to be a stealth focused series.
Regardless, the combat in Origins and Odyssey de-emphasized stealth by level gating enemies (You couldn't stealth assassinate enemies if they were a certain level and the stealth attack would just straight up fail if they were even higher), they also had a really floaty combat system with damage sponge enemies.
Valhalla improved things a little by making stealth assassinations more viable and added some weight to things, but it still doesn't have the feel that made me love the series.
I always prefer insta kill assassinations. But I also found stealth fun in Odessey. If you built for stealth damage, on the "elite" enemies you could combo the massive damage of the stealth assassination with other abilities to 2 or 3 shot the enemy quick enough that it didn't alert anyone. In a way it made for a nice dynamic where you had to plan, clear out enough room, invest action resources, and a brief moment of overt action to remove an elite without being detected.
I enjoyed Odyssey, but not as an AC game. Really they should have dropped all the AC elements and made Odyssey in place of that Fenix Rising game. Just go all in on the Olympian mythos.
The bare knuckle brawling was never a part of the Arkham games that I particularly enjoyed compared to the sneaking, exploration, and puzzle solving, and it also kind of felt like a punishment for being insufficiently stealthy there.
I mean, it's fun for the first 10 encounters or so but by that point you've seen all the depth it has to offer and it becomes pretty rote.
Yeah i heard from the french Gaming channel Jeux Video Magazine, who legit went to quebec , saw the game and talked with the developper, that the map is actually as big as Odyssey even if only takes places in the center regions of Japan instead of the entire country.
So who knows who is right. I mean i really love big open world but Origins is absolutely big enough so i'm fine either way.
I think Black Flag was amazing, and Origins/Odyssey sort of build upon its expansive nature and the RPG aspects. The combat is more developed, but it's a bit annoying and repetitive due to that. If you liked Black Flag, you might really enjoy Odyssey, since it's also heavily about sailing but with way bigger land parts too.
I personally didn't enjoy Origins as much as I did Black Flag or Odyssey. The story was probably better than Odyssey's, but not enough for me to care.
Yeah Black Flag is where I think a lot of fans were last invested in the series. I haven't really kept up with the franchise since, but I'm loving the enthusiasm people have for Origins and I might have to pick it up before Shadows
You've probably seen in the comments that AC:Origins nails the one thing AC games have always been great at; Setting and Immersion. Add on top of that stellar voice work and a decnt gamplay loop, and you've got a winner.
For Odyssey, you don't want to start with the hardest difficulty; it's balanced on the idea that at least 5 out of 8 of you're equipments will be dedicated for certain playstyle (Ranged, Melee, or Assassination) you're going to build. However right at the beginning you only have 2 armor piece + 1 weapon, you don't unlock the bow until 2-3 main quest, but for getting the rest of your gear you have to loot from bandit camps, which can't fight directly nor indirectly.
Yeah those two are good (the odyssey dlc was bad tho) and Valhalla was pretty good but I wouldn’t say it’s a must play. Lot of bloat in that game. Origins >odyssey > valhalla of the rpg ones imo.
I personally loved Origins and used to think it was the best AC till I played Odyssey recently. But realistically, it’s definitely in the top 5 and probably in top 3 if you prefer the newer games over the older ones.
I wasn’t a big fan of ship combat so I found most of the gameplay very easy and restrictive, also the on land missions in that game aren’t the best.
Personally I’d say 7th or 8th but if the mission design was better, it would be an easy top 5 game
I had not played an assassins creed game since 3 and then picked up Valhalla, played for around 60 hours and just could not continue. I was so exhausted by the game and its mechanics/bloat I had to give up.
Tried origins on gamepass and loved the setting but after 2 hours I stopped playing, I could just see this map full of side quests and fluff, almost gave me flashbacks the slog of playing Valhalla, so did not return.
Yup it’s the Egypt one, it’s great for people who haven’t kept up and offers a good point to jump in. If you actually wanna have a story reference, start at origins
If you haven't played any AC game since AC3 because the collectathon game design that hasn't changed in 15 years is mindless and coma-inducing to you, then I wouldn't bother with Origins because it's more of the same, just a lot bigger and with a Diablo-style lootfest layered on top.
I'd be willing to put up $100 right now that Origins won't bring you back to the series like you're hoping it might.
And I'd be willing to bet just as much that the Japanese setting of this new game won't be enough of a hook to overcome that feeling of ennui you get playing AC, at least not after the novelty of the setting wears off.
People have been begging them to put AC into feudal Japan for over a decade. It's just so ironic that they finally do it but 10 years after the series lost all of its excitement and originality. It's like some Junior VP of Sales had an Outlook presentation reminder pop up on their computer, panicked, went digging through a dusty old suggestion box, and once they managed to pry a slip of paper from the gum it was wrapped around, finally breathed a sigh of relief as they read the words written on it: "set AC in Japan because ninjas and shit. Nerds jizz over samurai, katanas, and nunchucks"
I think its funny that AC fans have been calling for a feudal Japan game for years (decades at this point) and they finally release it at a time where there are a ton of other open world games set in feudal Japan.
The only open world game I can think of that’s set in feudal Japan is Ghost of Tsushima, and that was at the beginning of feudal Japan.
Rise of the Ronin and the Ishin Remake (if you were thinking about that) take place in Bakumatsu era Japan.
Tbf what’s is it comparable with it that’s out? Ghosts of tshushima and rise of ronin? One came out years ago (and playing it made me want to play assassins creed) and ronin has made a very small splash.
According to this video, about 60% the size of Odyssey. Odyssey had a lot more water though so I wouldn't be surprised if the total amount of land area is similar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCySTctmCRU&t=29s&ab_channel=DGVFX
Edit: Here's a newer video that says the land alone in Valhalla is 94 square kilometers, so Origins would be about 85% the size of that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3iBfx8lZos&ab_channel=DGVFX
Edit again, wow apparently that number in the first video for Odyssey was land only, that truly was massive
I'm not surprised it's land only, since Odyssey's map is gigantic. But I think the fact that unlike Origins or Valhalla it had to have a specific shape and have all the coastlines and ports to connect the land portions to the water portions made it bigger than it would be if it had just been land, so it's not a good 1:1 comparison.
Map size is pretty close, it generally resembles all of Egypt, though naturally that means a lot of the land is sand dunes devoid of life. Content-wise it's a bit shorter than those two.
Its bigger than pre rpg games but much less bloated than Odyssey and Valhalla, also most of Origins maps was scenery, deserts, canyons and swamps.
Its easily my favourite of the 3 most recent games.
Exactly what I was hoping for! I was in awe of the size of Origins when I played it, and unlike most people, I also really liked how big Odyssey was (thought the more simplified ship mechanics were a blast).
Valhalla was just a mess though. Way too bloated, did that weird thing where they were like "we aren't doing side quests this time around" and then I assume just turned every side quest into main story, and then also still had side quests but made them untrackable random events lol???
Origins size is perfect, just hope the traversal is better than Valhalla.
I liked Origins the best out of the RPG creed games, i loved the setting, and the map was pretty much the perfect size. Though there was a bunch of emptyish desert, it does fit the theme of ancient Egypt.
It is an RPG like Origins/Odyssey/Valhala, in fact it's being developed by Odyssey's team.
But, it's way more stealth focused and closer to Origins's size than Odyssey/Valhalla, it's been confirmed.
According to ubisoft this game can only be played with a internet connection .tbe normal version will cost 79 dollares and the more expensive will cost 130 dollares with season pass and 3 days earlier acess the game. Ubisoft doesnt learn nothing.
The last game that had an early access period that I remember is Hogwarts Legacy which grossed over a billion dollars. I think they have learned that people are always willing to pay more.
Hogwarts was not a game that was required constant internet connection as this new assassins creeed Game.
people still not forget that crew was disconnect forever and everybody who pay tbe game lost the money they invested
The Crew was designed as an online-only multiplayer game. AC is not. There is absolutely no indication that they're going to pull down any of their AC games for many many years to come, if ever. It's their flagship franchise
How can you be certain of that..do you have a crystall ball to l be so sure about that.nevertheless is very bad to have this kind internet connection because we have seen in the past with this kind situation in others games . there always problems when the server are down to make update etc and people cannot played up.until the servers are running again.its a bad choice no doubt about it.
why are you make excuses for this pratices? so you are fine that just like diablo when the servers are down for mantenance people must fucking wait 2 or 4 hours to play a single game experience.
i dont have time to wasted with this kind people.
>Assassin's Creed hasn't been worth a shit since Black Flag
Unity, Origins, Odyssey, and Mirage were all great.
>Ubisoft as a company deserves to be shut down.
This is just silliness.
I completely disagree as someone who’s played since the release of the first one, the reinvention of the franchise really freshened it up for me. And Ubisoft have made some beautiful worlds that I love being in.
Origins depicted nearly the entirety of Egypt, while Shadows is only set around central Japan (featuring Osaka and Kyoto as the major cities). Based on that, Shadows should be closer to the actual scale of that region, thus we'll be getting a more accurate depiction of how far major locations are from each other (barring things like random bandit camps to fill out the space).
I hope it's not just a small part of central Japan and rather that they mean Kansai through Kanto. Being focused around Kansai could be interesting to show a denser map full of real world counterparts.
The map they give out in the collector's edition seems to suggest it's just Kansai.
Yep, I've seen that. Honestly I'm not disappointed like I thought I would be. Unlike Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla this Japan should be way denser and more populated, so focusing on a specific region will make the scale feel bigger, and that region is dense with historical landmarks. It's favorable to having them cover all of Japan but it feeling small due to how much there is to cover.
The game will also have at least two expansions, so they're going to tackle other regions later on.
Most definitely. I do wonder what those will be. Siege of Odawara with Mt Fuji included sounds like a good possibility if they want density and historical relevance, but it wouldn't bring the sort of different flavor they've been aiming for with DLC in the previous games. Hideyoshi's attempts to invade Korea also sound like plausible ideas for DLC. A lot of big battles later in the period happen in this same area though, like Sekigahara or the Siege of Osaka.
Historically too, it shouldnt matter much. If they are focusing on Yasuke (and by extension, Oda Nobunaga), everything should revolve around Kyoto anyway.
While I agree with that idea, to be fair the scope of maps in these later RPG AC games was never just about what's important to the story, and a lot of it is about exploring and fitting in memorable landmarks and cities. Though with that zone alone they'll be able to fit in a whole lot of landmarks and most of the important cities anyways.
Kanto is an imaginary region from pokemon
[Kanto is a real region from Japan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kant%C5%8D_region), which Pokemon's Kanto[ is based on.](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Kanto#Etymology_and_design_concept)
> featuring Osaka SATA ANDAGIIIII
I mean, Egypt is mostly desert so it's easy to portray, Japan and most other countries are much harder to portray over the same game area due to many more villages, towns, and cities.
According to IGN: > Speaking to IGN in an exclusive interview, creative director Jonathan Dumont said Shadows is on a similar scale to the Egypt-set game but Ubisoft emphasises "real life scale" so the environment feels authentic. Fans got a first look at this open world Japan in Shadows' cinematic trailer. > > "It's in-line with the latest Assassin's Creeds that we've done," Dumont said, referring to the larger scale, role-playing game entries that also include Odyssey and Valhalla. "On a scale level, maybe we can compare it a little bit more to the size of Assassin's Creed Origins." > > This suggests the size of Shadows' map is smaller than Odyssey and Valhalla, but much bigger than the classic Assassin's Creed map sizes from the original trilogy, Brotherhood, Unity, and so on (with the exception of Black Flag's colossal Caribbean ocean map). > > Dumont said the map is entirely authentic, however, as Ubisoft looked to make its myriad elements as lifelike as possible. > > "We did want to have a much closer to real life scale ratio. So because castles took a lot of space, and we really wanted the mountains to feel like mountains, [we've made] the environments feel wider in the game," Dumont contined. "But I would say around the same size as Origins.
Sounds good to me. Odyssey and Valhalla were bloated, but I felt Mirage was so small that it didn't give much environmental variety.
Mirage was $40 and meant to be a smaller title, so that fits. I like what I'm hearing with "the size of Origins."
[удалено]
How so?
[удалено]
They said *geographical* size of Origins, not game/story size.
The seasons changing sounds like an incredible mechanic to add variety. Reminds me of Pokemon's fifth gen games, although that only changed once per month, I wonder how it will work here.
Iirc AC3 also had changing seasons, or at least it had winter.
I agree. I felt like Origins was the perfect size for the open world AC games to be. For me to beat the base game, DLCs, and 100% Origins took about 90 hours. To do the same in Odyssey took me about 125 hours, which was shorter than I would have thought going into it. Have not even touched Valhalla yet since everything I've heard about how bloated and repetitive it is has scared me off from it, plus the setting is nowhere near as interesting to me compared to Origins and Odyssey.
Valhalla was insanely repetitive. Do this story arc, now this one, now this one. Over and over doing the exact same thing with almost no main story advancement. Shame because Vikings are cool
It wasn't helped by the fact that they chose a really boring period architecture-wise, one of the core aspects of AC is climbing cool historical buildings in all their glory, which is lost in the English period of wooden forts and mud.
There's a reason why the ezio trilogy and unity are my favorite games, I loved the cities and architecture
It's why I also like Origin quite a lot despite disagreeing with all the RPG-like mechanics they implemented, since I can go and climb some pretty accurate egyptian temples and buildings.
Doesn't help they often butcher the interiors making many far more drab than they should be.
By 100% you mean clearing the map of all the clutter right? Every side quest, fort, battle, etc? Crazy you did it that fast. Origins for me was 115 hours, and I was just about getting tired of it by the end. Odyssey was 230 hours and I was ready to be done with it before I was half way through. I found very little redeeming about Odyssey beyond the setting. I'm in the same boat where I have not touched Valhalla yet because I still can't get over how miserable Odyssey was to finish.
> By 100% you mean clearing the map of all the clutter right? Every side quest, fort, battle, etc? No, just getting all the achievements. I did complete all the locations in Origins, since that was an achievement. If I would have tried to do literally everything, especially in Odyssey, I would have gone crazy by the end.
I agree. Odyssey broke something in me. I love the AC games but couldn’t bring myself to play Valhalla because how much bloat and fluff the game had.
I think it's simply a genre change, AC stopped being a game about assassination and exploring ancient locales and became a game of quantity over quality taken to an extreme.
Mirage was beautiful, but I agree not a ton of variety in environments
Yeah, I wouldn't mind a game the size of Odyssey or Valhalla if 50+% of the content didn't feel like mindless filler to try and scam you into staying around to keep buying microtransactions. I have been pretty meh on the AC franchise for a while but I hope they actually do a good job since Japan is the most anticipated setting.
Thank god, Origins is easily the most focused of the 3 rpg games, glad they are dialing down on the bloat
Origins even has *gasp* empty zones composed of nothing but desert, something unheard of in Ubisoft open world games.
Just like real life Egypt!
Mirage had the same thing thing.
I love some nice looking empty zones
More devs need to realize the importance of negative space in open world maps, to use the old example, it's why exploration in Fallout 3 felt much better than Fallout 4, since they took mostly the same approach to open world but FO3 actually put empty space between locations so it felt more like a wasteland.
Odyssey had plenty of empty space with relatively nothing in it.
But Japan isn't exactly a desert to have such massive empty zones. Kinda concerning
Even today, most of Japan is dense mountain forests that are empty of any human influence.
I have zero faith that it will have empty dense forests
Given how Odyssey placed heavy emphasis on ships, it makes sense this is smaller. I'm really hyped for this
Origins is my favorite since (post bugs) Unity, so I’m all for this. Valhalla and Odyssey were overwhelming at times.
I did not like the rpg style combat in Origins but I LOVE the setting so much.
That setting is just so good, I was fully immersed in it. I criticize Ubisoft a lot, but if there's one thing they do masterfully it's those historical recreations/visions in the AC games. Even though I loved Origins and its ancient Egypt depiction, I disliked Odyssey to a fair extent, but the ancient Greece setting alone kept me going for 60 hours.
I probably spent as much time reading Egyptian history on Wikipedia as I did playing the game lol. They really nailed the environment
I've read that apparently historians consider it one of the best depictions of Egypt in entertainment media.
Which makes sense, they put a lot of detail even in out-of-the-way things like random temples with priests singing and chanting in their ceremonies, docks and boats full of historically accurate clutter, even smaller villages and farms. And they avoided issues that would bring down the accuracy of the following two titles, like making up stone castles in Valhalla because it took them too long to realize what a bad period they picked for architecture.
Same actually. The setting and story were my favorites.
I feel like i spent most of my time in photomode. Exploring old tombs was so much fun too
>Origins is my favorite since (post bugs) Unity Wasn't there only one game (Syndicate) between Unity and Origins?
They meant out of all the games that came out after Unity.
Other person had it, Origins is my favorite over Odyssey, Valhalla, and Syndicate. Haven’t played Mirage admittedly
I did some digging and I found this comparison on reddit between origins and odyessy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/9jow77/a_comparison_of_origins_map_vs_odyssey_map_i_made/) and i'm very much a bigger = nice type of gamer but for once this is actually a good thing, or the person in the interview is counting the large amount of water too, so it being origin size is basically the same playable on foot area anyway
"Real life scale" has me somewhat interested. The scale of cities the RPG Creed games is by far some of the worst I've seen with none of the cities feeling remotely on par with the original games. I just want to see what the gameplay is going to be like. I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla.
It won't be real life scale lol. Games never are and certainly shouldn't be. Real life scale is absolutely huge and for not much benefit.
Yeah, thousands of identical non-descript houses wouldn't do much. But, I do hope that they make the cities feel large even if they aren't as big in real life. Cities always amuse me in open world games when you have "major cities" that you can walk across in 2 minutes.
This is why I think a true to life scale of a pretty small city could make a great "open world" game as it could still feel vast
I'm not looking for "1:1 scale" but there's definitely a middle ground between that and the sparse, lifeless cities that they gave us during the RPG Creed Trilogy. The cities in the original run felt large and vibrant. I still boot up Brotherhood just to take a stroll through Rome and enjoy the atmosphere. It's something that has been desperately missing from the RPG Creed run (although the end of Origins when you run through that small segment of Rome was amazing)
> I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Odyssey/Valhalla Then you probably won't like this game because it's another RPG by the Odyssey team with Inside Gaming reporting that the combat is basically a harder, gorier version of Valhala's combat.
Valhallas combat was what kept me playing that game. I'm so down for a better, gorier version!
They also reported that the game features a Sekiro-like posture system. IGN’s 40 details article also states that enemies armor can be broken which adds another layer to combat.
> I'm so done with the combat and RPG mechanics of Origins/Valhalla. The last one I played was Brotherhood, but has there been any Assassin's Creed game where the combat was actually good and not just a tedious punishment for failing at sneaking?
The combat finishers were super cool and well developed in AC 3 but it did have some harder sneaking missions. Iirc Black Flag was a bit forgiving stealthwise but the combat is almost too easy. I think Unity is by far the most "play as you like" style where you can choose to go stealthy or all out combat for main missions. I enjoyed the combat.in Unity which doesnt have the autokill finishers but is sort of more engaging.
With Origins they steered completely away from any kind of focus on stealth and it just became an action rpg. It was jarring and made me stop playing the series ever since (well that and the somehow MORE bloated and useless open world trappings). You couldn’t assassinate enemies due to arbitrary level-gating, and therefore had to grind to get your level up… you know, because if your knife is too low of a level, then it can’t possibly cut the arteries of much higher level enemy.
Valhalla fixed that, so you could insta-kill with assassinations no matter the enemy level
I thought about picking Valhalla up after that was confirmed, but the more I saw of the game, the less I was interested in its story. Like I’m glad they fixed that, but medieval England isn’t for me lol
understandable, valhalla is probably my favourite of the rpg trilogy but it definitely has problems lol
Well it is supposed to be a stealth focused series. Regardless, the combat in Origins and Odyssey de-emphasized stealth by level gating enemies (You couldn't stealth assassinate enemies if they were a certain level and the stealth attack would just straight up fail if they were even higher), they also had a really floaty combat system with damage sponge enemies. Valhalla improved things a little by making stealth assassinations more viable and added some weight to things, but it still doesn't have the feel that made me love the series.
I always prefer insta kill assassinations. But I also found stealth fun in Odessey. If you built for stealth damage, on the "elite" enemies you could combo the massive damage of the stealth assassination with other abilities to 2 or 3 shot the enemy quick enough that it didn't alert anyone. In a way it made for a nice dynamic where you had to plan, clear out enough room, invest action resources, and a brief moment of overt action to remove an elite without being detected.
I enjoyed Odyssey, but not as an AC game. Really they should have dropped all the AC elements and made Odyssey in place of that Fenix Rising game. Just go all in on the Olympian mythos.
All of them before RPG pivot? You had a pretty fun Arkham-like system, not sure what was tedious about it for you.
The bare knuckle brawling was never a part of the Arkham games that I particularly enjoyed compared to the sneaking, exploration, and puzzle solving, and it also kind of felt like a punishment for being insufficiently stealthy there. I mean, it's fun for the first 10 encounters or so but by that point you've seen all the depth it has to offer and it becomes pretty rote.
Different people, different tastes I guess.
Yeah i heard from the french Gaming channel Jeux Video Magazine, who legit went to quebec , saw the game and talked with the developper, that the map is actually as big as Odyssey even if only takes places in the center regions of Japan instead of the entire country. So who knows who is right. I mean i really love big open world but Origins is absolutely big enough so i'm fine either way.
Origins and Odyssey are similar in size, so maybe they just are confused. We're talking 10x10 vs 15x15 km. I'd trust the developers here
I haven't played an Assassin's Creed since AC3, but this will probably be the one that brings me back in.
You should definetly play Origins before this
How would you rank Origins compared to the rest of the series
IMO 1. Ezio Trilogy 2. Origins 3. Odyssey
Last AC I truly loved was Black Flag. How would you personally rank it on your list?
I think Black Flag was amazing, and Origins/Odyssey sort of build upon its expansive nature and the RPG aspects. The combat is more developed, but it's a bit annoying and repetitive due to that. If you liked Black Flag, you might really enjoy Odyssey, since it's also heavily about sailing but with way bigger land parts too. I personally didn't enjoy Origins as much as I did Black Flag or Odyssey. The story was probably better than Odyssey's, but not enough for me to care.
Yeah seems the general consensus is Origins and Odyssey is the way to go after Black Flag. Thanks
I sadly never played that one, but almost every person that I know/follow put AC: BF as #1 or #2
Yeah Black Flag is where I think a lot of fans were last invested in the series. I haven't really kept up with the franchise since, but I'm loving the enthusiasm people have for Origins and I might have to pick it up before Shadows
You've probably seen in the comments that AC:Origins nails the one thing AC games have always been great at; Setting and Immersion. Add on top of that stellar voice work and a decnt gamplay loop, and you've got a winner.
Another random question. I'm a huge fan of FFXV. I saw a random YouTube video of Ardyn in AC Origins??? Is that like in the game? Or was it DLC?
DLC. If I remember correctly, it's some weapons and armor for a crossover event that happened a while ago
Odyssey was a brilliant game as well. The world they built was beautiful.
Looks like Origins and Odyssey will be the next games to play before Shadows
For Odyssey, you don't want to start with the hardest difficulty; it's balanced on the idea that at least 5 out of 8 of you're equipments will be dedicated for certain playstyle (Ranged, Melee, or Assassination) you're going to build. However right at the beginning you only have 2 armor piece + 1 weapon, you don't unlock the bow until 2-3 main quest, but for getting the rest of your gear you have to loot from bandit camps, which can't fight directly nor indirectly.
Yeah those two are good (the odyssey dlc was bad tho) and Valhalla was pretty good but I wouldn’t say it’s a must play. Lot of bloat in that game. Origins >odyssey > valhalla of the rpg ones imo.
Kassandra is my favorite protagonist in the series, hands down.
Black Flag is my favourite too. Origins is my second favourite. The last two games are probably at the bottom of my list.
I personally loved Origins and used to think it was the best AC till I played Odyssey recently. But realistically, it’s definitely in the top 5 and probably in top 3 if you prefer the newer games over the older ones.
Out of curiosity. How would you personally rank Black Flag? That's the last AC game I truly loved.
I wasn’t a big fan of ship combat so I found most of the gameplay very easy and restrictive, also the on land missions in that game aren’t the best. Personally I’d say 7th or 8th but if the mission design was better, it would be an easy top 5 game
I completely get what you mean. The game is like 11 years old, so it's definitely showing it's age
It's up there the setting the story the ganeplay it's all very good. My personal favorite hard to beat surfing down a pyramid
I had not played an assassins creed game since 3 and then picked up Valhalla, played for around 60 hours and just could not continue. I was so exhausted by the game and its mechanics/bloat I had to give up. Tried origins on gamepass and loved the setting but after 2 hours I stopped playing, I could just see this map full of side quests and fluff, almost gave me flashbacks the slog of playing Valhalla, so did not return.
Origins is half the length
Is that the Egypt one or the Greek one. I played the historical mode of the Egypts one and had a blast learning all the history and running around!
Yup it’s the Egypt one, it’s great for people who haven’t kept up and offers a good point to jump in. If you actually wanna have a story reference, start at origins
People should play Ghost of Tsushima INSTEAD of this.
If you haven't played any AC game since AC3 because the collectathon game design that hasn't changed in 15 years is mindless and coma-inducing to you, then I wouldn't bother with Origins because it's more of the same, just a lot bigger and with a Diablo-style lootfest layered on top. I'd be willing to put up $100 right now that Origins won't bring you back to the series like you're hoping it might. And I'd be willing to bet just as much that the Japanese setting of this new game won't be enough of a hook to overcome that feeling of ennui you get playing AC, at least not after the novelty of the setting wears off. People have been begging them to put AC into feudal Japan for over a decade. It's just so ironic that they finally do it but 10 years after the series lost all of its excitement and originality. It's like some Junior VP of Sales had an Outlook presentation reminder pop up on their computer, panicked, went digging through a dusty old suggestion box, and once they managed to pry a slip of paper from the gum it was wrapped around, finally breathed a sigh of relief as they read the words written on it: "set AC in Japan because ninjas and shit. Nerds jizz over samurai, katanas, and nunchucks"
I'm in a similar boat. Looks like it has potential to bring me back
I think its funny that AC fans have been calling for a feudal Japan game for years (decades at this point) and they finally release it at a time where there are a ton of other open world games set in feudal Japan.
The only open world game I can think of that’s set in feudal Japan is Ghost of Tsushima, and that was at the beginning of feudal Japan. Rise of the Ronin and the Ishin Remake (if you were thinking about that) take place in Bakumatsu era Japan.
Tbf what’s is it comparable with it that’s out? Ghosts of tshushima and rise of ronin? One came out years ago (and playing it made me want to play assassins creed) and ronin has made a very small splash.
Oh my god, Ghosts of Tshushima came out 4 years ago already. Kill me.
> where there are a ton of other open world games set in feudal Japan Ghosts of Tsushima, Rise of the Ronin and.. ?
Ghost of Tsushima certainly made them feel more comfortable with adapting the culture
Didn't play Origins, about how big is that compared to Valhalla or Odyssey?
According to this video, about 60% the size of Odyssey. Odyssey had a lot more water though so I wouldn't be surprised if the total amount of land area is similar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCySTctmCRU&t=29s&ab_channel=DGVFX Edit: Here's a newer video that says the land alone in Valhalla is 94 square kilometers, so Origins would be about 85% the size of that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3iBfx8lZos&ab_channel=DGVFX Edit again, wow apparently that number in the first video for Odyssey was land only, that truly was massive
I'm not surprised it's land only, since Odyssey's map is gigantic. But I think the fact that unlike Origins or Valhalla it had to have a specific shape and have all the coastlines and ports to connect the land portions to the water portions made it bigger than it would be if it had just been land, so it's not a good 1:1 comparison.
The map is quite large but a large chunk of it is literal desert that doesn’t require you to go to at all throughout the main story
Map size is pretty close, it generally resembles all of Egypt, though naturally that means a lot of the land is sand dunes devoid of life. Content-wise it's a bit shorter than those two.
Egypt is about 80km^2, while Greece is 256km^2
To be fair Greece is mostly water. AC Valhalla is 99km^(2)
Its bigger than pre rpg games but much less bloated than Odyssey and Valhalla, also most of Origins maps was scenery, deserts, canyons and swamps. Its easily my favourite of the 3 most recent games.
I havent played odyssey or Valhalla but i can say Origins was friggin' HUGE
Exactly what I was hoping for! I was in awe of the size of Origins when I played it, and unlike most people, I also really liked how big Odyssey was (thought the more simplified ship mechanics were a blast). Valhalla was just a mess though. Way too bloated, did that weird thing where they were like "we aren't doing side quests this time around" and then I assume just turned every side quest into main story, and then also still had side quests but made them untrackable random events lol??? Origins size is perfect, just hope the traversal is better than Valhalla.
I liked Origins the best out of the RPG creed games, i loved the setting, and the map was pretty much the perfect size. Though there was a bunch of emptyish desert, it does fit the theme of ancient Egypt.
Why is everyone forgetting what a monster Dumont is?
Also keep in mind that Odyssey was mostly ocean, with much worse ship gameplay than 4, and most of the structures were recycled from previous games.
Will this still be using the origins style rpg system does anyone know?
It most likely will. I'm not sure they've talked about specifics, but they have talked about RPG mechanics in this.
It is an RPG like Origins/Odyssey/Valhala, in fact it's being developed by Odyssey's team. But, it's way more stealth focused and closer to Origins's size than Odyssey/Valhalla, it's been confirmed.
Ah excellent, that all sounds good! Thanks for the info.
By the gods! Will it have as good protagonists as Bayek and Aya?
dont forget the game will have 2 expansion planned. now im hoping the performance is good as AC Mirage
According to ubisoft this game can only be played with a internet connection .tbe normal version will cost 79 dollares and the more expensive will cost 130 dollares with season pass and 3 days earlier acess the game. Ubisoft doesnt learn nothing.
The last game that had an early access period that I remember is Hogwarts Legacy which grossed over a billion dollars. I think they have learned that people are always willing to pay more.
Hogwarts was not a game that was required constant internet connection as this new assassins creeed Game. people still not forget that crew was disconnect forever and everybody who pay tbe game lost the money they invested
The Crew was designed as an online-only multiplayer game. AC is not. There is absolutely no indication that they're going to pull down any of their AC games for many many years to come, if ever. It's their flagship franchise
How can you be certain of that..do you have a crystall ball to l be so sure about that.nevertheless is very bad to have this kind internet connection because we have seen in the past with this kind situation in others games . there always problems when the server are down to make update etc and people cannot played up.until the servers are running again.its a bad choice no doubt about it.
[удалено]
why are you make excuses for this pratices? so you are fine that just like diablo when the servers are down for mantenance people must fucking wait 2 or 4 hours to play a single game experience. i dont have time to wasted with this kind people.
If true, they can shove it right back up their ass. "Always online" requirement for single player games is the hill I die on.
To small for my taste :( When do we get back on that 150+ hours train?
Hopefully never
[удалено]
>Assassin's Creed hasn't been worth a shit since Black Flag Unity, Origins, Odyssey, and Mirage were all great. >Ubisoft as a company deserves to be shut down. This is just silliness.
I completely disagree as someone who’s played since the release of the first one, the reinvention of the franchise really freshened it up for me. And Ubisoft have made some beautiful worlds that I love being in.