Assassin's Creed thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Scream Aim Fire said:
Mind explaining what's so bad about Origins? Legit question; haven't really looked it over in a while, and I was in the mood for some Egyptian stuff.
Click to expand...
From my understanding, it was when Assassin's Creed stopped being a stealth action historical game and changed its formula into a hack-and-slash action game with RPG mechanics and damage mechanics. I don't think the story was memorable either from its bloated open world design.
 
Scream Aim Fire said:
Mind explaining what's so bad about Origins? Legit question; haven't really looked it over in a while, and I was in the mood for some Egyptian stuff.
Click to expand...
In addition to what @The Last Stand, it's just a boring game that's designed to waste your time on meaningless drivel disguised as objectives. It's not even a good hack and slash cause no matter what level you are, you never deal enough damage that feels satisfying. You can't even stealth assassinate with the hidden blades anymore cause of the "rpg" leveling system. I'd rather collect every flag in the first Ass Creed.
 
All that said it's still one of the best digital representations of Egypt so it's worth playing a bit for that. Just don't fall for the 100% completion map clearing thing because it's exactly as shallow and worthless as everyone says.
 
I think Odyssey was better received despite being the same game because of its female protagonist, Cassandra.
 
BScCollateral said:
I haven't played the game, but I've seen playthroughs.
So this might be offbase, but is there anything in the game that suggests Yasuke is African? I mean, I know he's black, but does he ever do anything like teaching his friends how to play Mancala, does he tell any identifiable childhood stories to the kids he encounters, does he draw parallels between a Shinto Mirror and the mirrors on Nkondi, anything like that at all which might suggest he's a man from africa and not just an empty vessel waiting to be filled?
Click to expand...
Colress said:
If I recall it does show him on a slaver's ship for a major plot point and it does point to him being from africa (as well as a pendant his mom is wearing iirc?) He also says that where he comes from, everybody looks like him- but he never specifies further.

I might be misremembering but I think someone calls him "the african" too.
Click to expand...
BScCollateral said:
So absolutely no evidence of any research?
Click to expand...
Colress said:
Not a single bit. It's entirely bullshit lmfao
Click to expand...
Ah yes, because how dare you assume a black guy in an incredibly homogeneous country during the 16th century comes from Africa, don't you know blacks were all over the world in those times? He could be british!!!1
Idiots.
 
Brain Power said:
Ah yes, because how dare you assume a black guy in an incredibly homogeneous country during the 16th century comes from Africa, don't you know blacks were all over the world in those times? He could be british!!!1
Idiots.
Click to expand...
Indian, maybe. The Jesuits who brought him to Japan spent some time there.
We really know fuck-all about the guy, but that's one of those things a competent writer would settle before the script was finished. A note along the lines of "While the historical record doesn't say, we assume he was from the Congo for this fictional depiction." That would be fine.
 
BScCollateral said:
Indian, maybe. The Jesuits who brought him to Japan spent some time there.
We really know fuck-all about the guy, but that's one of those things a competent writer would settle before the script was finished. A note along the lines of "While the historical record doesn't say, we assume he was from the Congo for this fictional depiction." That would be fine.
Click to expand...
I do recall seeing his mom in a major cutscene and she looked African for sure.

1000076273.webp

But in terms of actual research, I have no idea. Fandom wiki says African too.
 
Spud said:
In addition to what @The Last Stand, it's just a boring game that's designed to waste your time on meaningless drivel disguised as objectives. It's not even a good hack and slash cause no matter what level you are, you never deal enough damage that feels satisfying. You can't even stealth assassinate with the hidden blades anymore cause of the "rpg" leveling system. I'd rather collect every flag in the first Ass Creed.
Click to expand...
It's not even a bad idea on paper. I would think it's Ubisoft's implementation of those mechanics is where it made Assassin's Creed a slog.
 
I want to like AC3 since I love the idea of a game set in the colonial America, but from everything I am seeing it is just too easy. If I only played AC4, should I bother with AC2 and the other Ezio games, or is that the only good one?
 
30+GameOvers said:
I want to like AC3 since I love the idea of a game set in the colonial America, but from everything I am seeing it is just too easy. If I only played AC4, should I bother with AC2 and the other Ezio games, or is that the only good one?
Click to expand...

My advice would be similar to Total War, stick with the games where the setting interests you. People were criticizing the series as it went on because the gameplay was stagnant or on release were broken messes, not really because Unity or Syndicate were shitty in themselves.
 
Scream Aim Fire said:
Mind explaining what's so bad about Origins? Legit question; haven't really looked it over in a while, and I was in the mood for some Egyptian stuff.
Click to expand...
Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla are part of the 'myths' trilogy. They're built like open-world collectathons and you could even say they modernized the genre. God of War, Hogwarts Legacy, Ghosts of Sushi and many others literally cloned the leveling system, the ability 'wheel', scrapping gear and having a transmog system. But because people grew up with a (imo) boring, linear, binary kind of game in the first ACs, they do not like it.

I enjoy collectathons and the mythological trilogy is great. Yea, smoke bombs being defensive instead of practical, barely any in-world traps to trigger etc sucks, but the way you can make actual builds makes up for it imo. Origins is the first and most down to earth of them. It still tries to hang onto the stealth angle, whereas Odyssey goes full "teleport and chain stab 5 people". I really liked Mirage as well, but it took me ages to realize "oh wait, I literally have to get up to people to kill them" cause I was so used to some kind of teleport.

I played Odyssey before Origins and the way the two melt together in way of Cleopatra and such relations was really cool. Odyssey is the vastly superior one I'd say, leaning into the colorful take on ancient Greece (duh). People consider them time sinks which they are, but I'd say the time is put in better than so many other games these days. You buy a $18 co-op horror, play 16 hours then do it again a week later. You can get all 3 AC games at like... $8 each if you're lucky.

In terms of actual AC lore and story progression, Origins Odyssey and Valhalla are the only ones still trying. Shadows had -zero- outside-the-animus content. Odyssey even had combat segments outside of it. You can do a lot worse than beating Origin and Odyssey. Valhalla is an acquired taste but once you're done with it, you realize 'oh right shit, no other games do open-world medieval england like this'.
 
lmfao the rpg games basically killed the franchise's flow and gameplay cohesion, what the fuck are you on about? i only played shadows for a good laugh, and because i didn't want to waste the $30 my friend paid for it. switching to the full rpg format was an absolute fucking mistake- one they tried to fix with mirage iirc but that didn't stick for some fucking reason.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom