Assassin's Creed Odyssey

The game does look stunning. Getting 55fps in-game on an rx580 at 1080 with most of the settings maxxed. Also have managed to control the heat with a small under volt so pretty pleased.
 
Pudney said:
Nice summary, I hadn't realised there had be so many by now! Origins sounds like a definite in that case, may try to look a bit at some gameplay videos of the others.

Stupid games making me spend money...
Click to expand...
Before you buy the older AC games, be aware that if you be buying the Season Pass for Odyssey, you also get the remastered versions of Assassin's Creed III and Liberation, as @CaptainRAVE mentioned as well. Unless you bought the version with the season pass already, then you get them once they are out anyway. :p
 
Tombstone said:
They've gone backward in time since Origins, I reckon they will go backward in time again for the next title, maybe to around 500BC or somewhere around there, so China is a possibility maybe, thats around the time of Confucious so plenty of spiritual/philosophical things they could do, its also around the time of Sun Tzu, so military things they could do and they do like to have famous NPCs in the game and Confucious and Sun Tzu would fit that bill.

Of course Rome would also fit the timeframe of 500BCish and allow them to go backward in time again, but maybe a little too samey as Ancient Greece/Egypt.

Thats all of course if they go backward in time again rather than forward.
Click to expand...

Rome would be a bit too much, IMO. Lots of Greek accents in Origins, then Greece itself...

Yeah, I reckon they might go back in time again but I hope they go for something really unique, I'd totally be up for China during the time of Confucius. However, I do think they're going back too far and leaving out some really great settings/periods like colonial Hong Kong I've mentioned or India, the Spanish conquest of Yucatán, the Mongol Empire etc. I'm getting a bit fed up with Europe.
 
Bazzards said:
If this game has taught me one thing, its never to trust reviewers. I don't agree any of them. The game for me has improved and streamlined Origins and is fantastic as a result. Only level 13, so a long way to go.

edit: Would just add, I never used the micro transactions in Origins and don't intend to in this. They just aren't needed to progress.
Click to expand...

The internet reviewers just talk nonsense. I've mentioned it a few times, they just want to blast through the titles in order to get their reviews out asap to get hits. Reviewers are also sheep, they set a trend of moaning or praising a certain thing about a game and then you'll see all the other reviewers jump onto that bandwagon and repeat it word for word. Sometimes I do wonder if some of these reviewers actually play the games at all, or just watch a few other reviews and then create a review parroting the same things to make it seem like they have.

Jimpressions review for example, goes on and on about the microtransactions and how you are forced to do side quests and buy boosters...

Well....point 1...you do side quests in a game? Shock horror ! Since when did gamers get so entitled and want everything on a plate? Of course you do side quests..good god man, I've done side quests in RPGs for 30 damned years, side quests are part and parcel of the genre ! You seriously telling me that every MMO should be marked down for making you do side quests, that Witcher should be marked down because of side quests, that Divinity Original Sin or Baldurs Gate should be marked down because of side quests. Pathetic excuse to moan about the title and entirely evidential of someone simply trying to blast through a game as quickly as possible.

Point 2..microtransactions. Again, fake news, utter bunkum and yet more proof of someone simply trying to blast through a game as quickly as possible. Lets see, where are we in this thread...page 34, several hundred posts...take a poll, see how many people in this thread who have played and enjoyed the game have bought boosters etc...whats that you say? Hardly anyone?? But how can that be possible !? When so many reviewers are telling us that you cant progress in the game without spending money? Or that microtransactions are an enforced necessity? However did we all manage to play?

Reviewer bunkum, total fake news, Ubisoft bashing because its cool to bash Ubisoft, or drama creating because drama sells. Whatever the reasons, its exceptionally poor and biased reviewing and simply factually wrong.

Rant over :D
 
Amatsubu said:
Rome would be a bit too much, IMO. Lots of Greek accents in Origins, then Greece itself...

Yeah, I reckon they might go back in time again but I hope they go for something really unique, I'd totally be up for China during the time of Confucius. However, I do think they're going back too far and leaving out some really great settings/periods like colonial Hong Kong I've mentioned or India, the Spanish conquest of Yucatán, the Mongol Empire etc. I'm getting a bit fed up with Europe.
Click to expand...

My expectation is that they will go backward in time for the next title, maybe Rome, maybe Japan or China and then after that they will jump forward in time again, which could open the doorway to something more out of leftfield, like Mongolia or Spanish Colonisation of the West etc.

I wouldnt mind them going forward in time and doing something with Vikings, I think theres a lot of promise with something Norse. Vikings would allow for naval combat, land combat, covers archery, axes, swords, shields , armour crafting etc, lots of cosmetic options, has loads and loads of myths and legends, creatures and a lavish pantheon of Gods and lore surrounding them.
 
Simple explanation.

Which article do you think got more clicks and earned more money for Polygon?

The review article that said it was a good game?

Or the article that said the "best feature is hidden behind a paywall' or whatever clickbait headline they used?

Best bet is to just ignore outliers that are more than likely just being contrarian to get clicks, and listen to the general consensus.
 
mid_gen said:
Simple explanation.

Which article do you think got more clicks and earned more money for Polygon?

The review article that said it was a good game?

Or the article that said the "best feature is hidden behind a paywall' or whatever clickbait headline they used?

Best bet is to just ignore outliers that are more than likely just being contrarian to get clicks, and listen to the general consensus.
Click to expand...

Yup, its a bit like those Rotten Tomatoes reviews where the critics give a film a certain mark and then you look at the viewers mark and its completely the opposite :)
 
Does a game review need to try covering the whole thing with a limited number of hours to "work" on it? Maybe they could focus on whether a game delivers an enjoyable 10 hours and leave it at that.
 
Great. I've got a ghost/bugged mission now because I've looted a chest like I first hit the Athens region a long time ago. I now have a quest is now pointing to on the Isle of Salamis, just west of Athens. If anyone is on this island - DO NOT loot the south section of the island where there is a Red Fort icon on the map. Hell don't even go there or you'll ruin a good mission you will encounter later on.

The Blind King - his reward to you lies in the above mentioned area.
 
The thing that gets me is these 'reviewers' are from what I can read complaining the world map is too big?????? and there are too many quests????

As long as I'm enjoying the exploration, combat and gameplay I'm in no rush to finish.
 
I have been having a blast, and yes the game is huge, and so much stuff to do, brings the OCD out in you lol, for reference, I got 36 hours in so far, and main quest is 35% complete, and the map looks barely explored lol, loving it.
 
Won the arena and became the number 1 mercenary.
I’m now 72 hours into it and still got a bit more to do for two odyssey’s, who knows how many quests are still available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom