Assassin's Creed: Odyssey - Choices and Consequences

@Rastm4N Assassin's Creed Odyssey has a new trailer which comes with English subtitles.

loading…

New gameplay of Assassin's Creed Odyssey and showcase of your choices with english subtitles.

Thanks Farflame!

More information.

Additionally, and this is probably what everyone and their mother wants to hear:
https://www.pcgamesn.com/assassins-c…y-service-game

Assassin’s Creed Odyssey is “a big core single-player experience,” not a service game

Talking to us at Gamescom 2018, Odyssey’s creative director Scott Philips says: “We’re a big, core single-player experience. We want to keep the game alive and we want people to keep coming back to it, so we’ve planned quite a lot to keep people engaged once we’ve launched. But games as a hobby is more like Rainbow Six Siege, where you’ll play that every week with your friends. Odyssey is more like you’ll play a big bunch of it, and then we’ll keep it alive for a longer period of time as we add new things.”
Phillips emphasises that, despite huge service-game powerhouses like Rainbow Six Siege dominating people’s time and the gaming scene as a whole, there’s still a big market for people who crave more traditional games. “I think there’s still a big audience for that.” he says. “I know for me personally that’s the kind of thing I want to play, so I’m happy to have made that kind of thing”.

Well, me too.

And I have to admit this is kind of scary as well, I don't want to miss any quests or rewards or anything.

*sigh*

I have to say that I find this direction of this and the last Assassin's Creed game interesting… I haven't played either but I did play one of them many years ago and it seemed like more of a shallow, action-y collect-a-thon. Not my kind of game.

It is interesting that they seem to be trending to a deeper, more RPG-like experience. That seems to buck the industry trend of watering games down, making them more MMO-like, etc to give them broader appeal. Or, maybe RPGs are really now a thing that has broad appeal.

Originally Posted by SSIGuy
I have to say that I find this direction of this and the last Assassin's Creed game interesting… I haven't played either but I did play one of them many years ago and it seemed like more of a shallow, action-y collect-a-thon. Not my kind of game.

It is interesting that they seem to be trending to a deeper, more RPG-like experience. That seems to buck the industry trend of watering games down, making them more MMO-like, etc to give them broader appeal. Or, maybe RPGs are really now a thing that has broad appeal.

I can’t speak to this new game but origins was still a shallow, actiony collect-a-thon. I found it quite fun anyway.

Not every game needs to be a deep masterpiece sometimes some casual fun is good too. My opinion and all.

The quality of AC games over the years has varied, probably partly due to different development studios working on the different games.

In my view, and I think this opinion is shared by many others, AC 2, AC 4 Black Flag, AC Syndicate, and the latest AC Origins are significantly better than the others. 2, 4, and Origins are in my view great, with Origins being the most RPG-like if that makes a difference.

I simply don't like the AC missions. Too similar to GTA/RDR type missions where half the time I have to fail the mission once just to understand what the hell I am supposed to do to succeed.

C&C: it is RPG.

Originally Posted by Ovenall
I simply don't like the AC missions. Too similar to GTA/RDR type missions where half the time I have to fail the mission once just to understand what the hell I am supposed to do to succeed.

AC is not GTA/RDR nor will ever be, dunno where did you get that idea.

AC Origins does have chariot races. And each and every single one of those is optional in a way it doesn't affect neither the story nor you get anything you could use in the rest of game from it. Never played RDR, but in GTA racing with different vehicles is mandatory and you can't ignore it plus there are optional races with different vehicles that gain you stuff to use in the rest of the game.

There is not a single mission that I'm aware of in AC Origins where you have no idea what are you supposed to do. If you mean puzzles, then sorry, puzzles are supposed to be cracked. GTA has no puzzles, only horrible controls for helicopter on numpad where you're never sure what keys actually do.

Assassin's Creeds are like the Marvel movies of games, to me. There's loads of them, by halfway through I don't care anymore, and though loads of stuff happens, I couldn't recall what any of it was.

Do they still have the whole thing with some sort of corporation projecting your consciousness through time, or whatever that was about? I could do without all that distracting from the historical setting.

Originally Posted by Ripper
Do they still have the whole thing with some sort of corporation projecting your consciousness through time, or whatever that was about? I could do without all that distracting from the historical setting.

Origins had a small part set in the future about three of four segments, but it didn't distract you from the historical part. As each part lasted 5-10 mins at most.

I agree with you about removing them but it ties into the series with the cults & other groups eventually becoming the Templar's, and the whole Desmond Arc.

Thanks. That's still a bit of a drag, IMO. I'd like to dip into these new ones without worrying about any of that nonsense, that I lost track of long ago.

Originally Posted by Morrandir

And I have to admit this is kind of scary as well, I don't want to miss any quests or rewards or anything.

*sigh*

Well, core AC fans are not RPG players who are usually ok with that kind of consequences so… Also some players dont like to play games more times to see all stuff they missed in first playthrough. I think that even some RPG fans dont like to play RPGs more than once.

Replaying a game because it had two mutually exclusive achievements (for example joining a faction unlocks one but locks another achievement), because some content appears only in NG+ or because there is so called the true ending to see - is cheap and retarded design.
A reason to replay a game should be having enormous fun with it, not irrelevant "missables". Did I replay TW3 so Ciri finally dies and I get the achievement for that (dunno if such achievement exists)? Or to clear all stupid question marks at sea? No! I replayed it because I had so much fun with it. And I didn't clear those question marks nor ever will.

In other words, when I see a professional review stating "high replayability" I grow some more gray hair. I read it: a scam to make you waste time on repetition of mediocre or bad content instead of moving to a new quality product. Because if the game was very good, mentioning replayability is not needed.

Originally Posted by Farflame
Well, core AC fans are not RPG players who are usually ok with that kind of consequences so… Also some players dont like to play games more times to see all stuff they missed in first playthrough. I think that even some RPG fans dont like to play RPGs more than once.

Yep, I'm one of the gamers that doesn't want to replay a game. But still I think choices with significant consequences are important for a better experience and being scared by that is strange to me.

But indeed the AC community comes from another type of game. Perhaps some of them will even be intrigued by actual choices and take one more peak in full fledges RPGs - which would be a good thing.

Looks pretty good. Dialogue flow seems a bit stunted, don't expect too heavy c&c, but at least they're making effort for quest/story to be more engaging. ( don't expect Witcher quality, though).
World is always a star in AC games, level of detail is off the charts. Plus they're adding some Nemesis mercenary mechanic, and Global war between factions. And gameplay seems pretty solid with more open levels than can play out in variety of ways. Tbh, I'm far more excited for this than any Bethesda "rpg".

I choose to not play this one and I doubt I will be suffering much in the way of consequence

Your loss.

I most likely will play at least once. I don't mind missing content, never have. Hell I have almost 4K hours in Skyrim and I still have not done all the Daedric Prince quests as I see some of them as things my character would not do; never did the vampire side of the DW quests as I don't like vampires; never sided with the Storm Cloaks … and the like. More important to me to stay true to the role playing of my character than to see all content and achievements … pointless.

I very much doubt ACO will be anywhere close to the RPG of Beth games, which offer the most freedom to roleplay and explore open worlds. Far prefer Skyrim and FO4 over the lack of real RP in Witcher as an example with its set protagonist. ACO also has a set protagonist which is why I have always avoided the series. But I did enjoy the ME games so sometimes I don't mind. Any game with a more defined protagonist, though, are usually a one time play through.

I did not care much for what I saw of the combat with the "Medusa" but admit I do like the graphics a lot and the male version of the protagonist certainly looks good, which is also a nice plus. So while not thrilled with combat, which isn't a huge thing for me anyhow, the rest is looking good. Hoping this will be the first AC game I end up enjoying.

I believe AC Odyssey doesn't have repeated or so called radiant quests - that's why you won't be playing it for thousands of hours.