Assassins Creed Shadows - AC finally (at last) heads to Japan

[Tombstone]

 

[Tombstone]

This should have been a new IP. The more recent games are Assassins Creed in name only. The original story has been altered, modified and diluted so much that it seems superfluous to the enjoyment.

I tend not to even look at them as AC games or whats written on the (virtual) box now. Instead I just consider whether they are good games or not. AC Origins and AC Odyssey were AC games only in name (especially Odyssey) but I felt that both were very good games. As long as the game itself is good , then I will enjoy it, no matter what naming banner it chooses to wave

 

[Tombstone]

About the size of Origins from what I've read online.

That would be a good size for it to be, Origins had a good sense of scale and size without being unwieldly large

 

[Tombstone]

How big was that compared to O/V ? I never actually played that one as I was having a bit of AC burnout and took a break after Syndicate. Odyssey pulled me right back in though and I loved the scale of that game.

In terms of landmass (Odyssey had a lot of sea of course) , I think Origins is about 2/3rds the size of Odyssey. Smaller, but still large.

 

[Tombstone]

Lot of unhappy Japanese gamers as expected. It’s going to flop hard in Japan. The only samurai ranked foreigners in Japanese history were English and a Dutchman.

Odd that those Japanese gamers didnt complain when Nioh was released in 2017 with Yasuke the black samurai in it....or in 2021 when the game Samurai Warrior 5 released with Yasuke the black Samurai in it. One is left wondering if its because of the black samurai or because its Ubisoft.

 

[Tombstone]

Not really the same, Yasuke is the main character in this game.

Ah, so their complaint isnt that there is a Samurai in the game who is black at all then, its just that its one of the main characters that they are against. Interesting.....stupid, but interesting

If I was those Japanese gamers, I would be far more worried/interested in whether the game is actually good and fun to play, than what colour the skin is of a character who they spend 90% of the game looking at the back of their helmeted head and cant even see their skin.

 

[Tombstone]

Sweet baby inc 100% garunteed

Looking at the games they've been associated with, most notably God of War Ragnarok, Assassins Creed Valhalla , Shadow Gambit (brilliant game btw for anyone who hasnt tried it) and Alan Wake 2, I cant say that necessarily puts me off. All of those were good games

A lot of people get so wrapped up in contraversies that they forget the first fundamental question of a game - is it fun?

 

[Tombstone]

seriously? valhalla was a good game? I thought it was the most disliked one so far and terribly boring

I enjoyed it and I'm far from alone in that, it did go on too long imo but I still enjoyed it , but I would also add that rather than selecting just one of the games I mentioned, God of War Ragnarok, Shadow Gambit and Alan Wake 2 are also all considered good
games (by more than just me )

As I say, as long as its a good game, fun, with a decent amount of content, I truly dont really care what contraversy is twisting knickers this time round. Just a shame that theres so many people out there in gamer land who put whether a game is fun and enjoyable lower down their list of game requirements when imo it should be at the top of the list.

 

[Tombstone]

As long as I have some nice buildings to scale and haystacks to jump into, I'll be happy.
Thoroughly enjoyed Odyssey and Valhalla so if this is more of the same I'll have it on Day1.

I spent 180 hours in Odyssey and 150 in Valhalla. Genuinely couldn't tell you the story of either

The story in AC has got all rather convoluted over the series and frankly all a bit silly lol, but the crux of it as far as I remember is something to do with a potentially alien race , present on Earth 100,000 years ago, hiding artifacts around the planet which can give humans who have them god like super powers, or something like that. Basically someone raided the mind of Stan Lee

 

[Tombstone]

Yea, I never tried or looked into those.
AC series seems pretty stale though, so probably doesn't matter if it's some weird alternate reality with crappy characters.


No doubt won't be on steam, if it is they will require a uplay account anyway.

I think the last o]ne I played was the greek odyssey one, so I'm not their target audience anyway

If it's a historical accurate representation of japan at the time, I could be tempted, if it's some made up rainbow fantasy land and culture then I'm out 100%


Story being a wike wokey I could probably ignore if the game was fun and interesting to explore.

Dont know if you like tactical games but if you do, I highly recommend Shadow Gambit, its a real corker which rather went under the radar when it was released.

 

[Tombstone]

Please be good. I’d love another Origins or Odyssey.

I’ve completed every AC game and I’ve honestly lost track of what’s going on, not even bothered about the bigger picture anymore. Just love the open worlds.

Pretty much the same here for me, the story doesnt mean much to me in AC any more but they do make really good open worlds to run about in, so I run about and make my own story

 

[Tombstone]

Yasuke: Revision history - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

some funny comments

just hope they get the movement and combat fluidity sorted out, some movement and animations in Valhalla where pretty stiff and this game is going up against a lot of action combat samurai games

No idea what is more bizarre, that people out there use wikipedia as a factual source for things or that people out there are so distraught by a computer games appearance (rather than its actual gameplay) that they are compelled to go and edit information on a website. Two sides of the same mental coin

 

[Tombstone]

yeah he's already appeared in a few other games as a samurai, historically accurate or not

He could be Timmy Mallett for all I care, as long as the game is good to play

 

[Tombstone]

I actually cannot even remember if any of the previous AC games have required an always online connection or not

 

[Tombstone]

Assassins Creed ended for me with Ezio and this trajectory is exactly why I've concluded that this was a good idea.

I sincerely hope Ubisoft stops existing.

I hope not, I'm waiting on The Division 3 !

 

[Tombstone]

Origins is the best of the recent games for me. The setting is amazing, the world is just the right size, there aren't too many systems and extra fluff. The story is the right length and the most engaging of the 3 with the best characters and performances.

Odyssey is a very close second mind. Valhalla is just a bit too brown and muddy and a slog to get through..... much like life in England at the time I guess. Too many systems, annoying to have to faff about upgrading your settlement to progress the story.

Definitely agree on the AC Origins characters, Bayek is awesome, would love another AC game with more of Bayeks story

 

[Tombstone]

I'll probably try this when there's another cheap month of Ubisoft plus or whether it's called.

Definitely the best way to play this I would say, all the content for £14.99 a month, lets face it many people would finish it within a month so they can have the game, play it, finish it, all for just £15, instead of whatever the RRP is. Its a reason why I cant understand why there are some quarters of the internet who are up in arms screaming that Ubisoft is making us pay £130 for the game...er...no , no they arent, £15 yes, £130...no, but dramatic video titles = clicks

 

[Tombstone]

That's a very naive approach to the problem. And yes, it's a big probem.

If you can't see it, then you're part of it.

Then I guess I am part of it because I dont see it. I can pay £15 for the game, play it, complete it. Seems good to me. I'm afraid if theres a problem there, you'll have to explain to me what it is and why it is a problem.

 

[Tombstone]

I'm legit not sure if you're serious mate...

Edit: If you want, I am seriously happy jumping on a disco call to explain my view and why I think the pricing (let's just call it what it is, it's a SaaS scaling model, entice to subscribe) model is predatory and overall, a terrible approach to how games should be owned/rented. It's a lot to write down why the gaming industry is ****** at the AAA level.

I'm serious yeah, for £15 I can get the game and complete it, which is a good price for a new title for me. I "own" 468 games on Steam, probably 400 of those I will never play again so their value to me is zilch. Prior to steam, I bought hard copies of probably over 1000 games (if not more) in the last 40+ years, almost none (if any) I will ever play again, so again although I own them, their value to me is zero. "Owning" a title is no longer an important thing for me, because the value of owning a title is negligible, all the matters is the cost to me of playing and finishing a game and for that purpose, £15 for AC Shadows is great (as is my MS Gamepass account and all the games I have played on that for a token price compared to the RRP of said games)

 

[Tombstone]

As you said, suits you and I'm never gonna **** on someone's fire, which is why I said you are being naive as you may be able to finish a title in a month, I know I can't with the limited time I have lol.

My main gripe is how it's become the standard to subscribe to games and in the above quote, it gives a great example. You've accumulated a number of games via steam which yea, I agree with is still iffy given you 'own' them (can't be removed from your library if it's on store or not) but not truly own. But let's say you paid a subscription to gain access to those titles (assuming only one sub gets you all titles.....), add that up over the 40+ years and suddenly it's a pretty large number. Of which you're subscribed to a service in this example so who's to say it doesn't change and 'old' games just get removed.

The problem isn't now, it's to come and it scares me that it isn't obvious, thankfully it's only the big greedy buggers like Ubi trying this on for size.

Everything is subscription based and on face value it's worth it. Chuck in all the extras and dlc in this case to entice the player to sub. They play it over a few weeks, maybe a couple of months, great value... But in the industry, the money is always going to be better capturing subs as people just forget to cancel.

I agree, if you are smart and cancel after subscribing then go at it, indeed it's a good bargain. But again, my problem isn't for this specific title, or this specific scenario, its at the problem of gaming becoming just another reoccurring cost to my bank every month with in game purchases such as season passes and the likes to keep up to date also taking chunk of my money.... That's not how I want to play my games in the years this will happen.

When I talk about this I normally get, 'just don't pay for it then'. Yea, thanks, but if I want to remain paying what RRP should be for a game, I'm now starting to get scalped of content for it. It's wrong. And it's getting worse.

Yeah, I do at least 50 hours per week gaming, sometimes more, so I can easily finish even the largest of titles in a month

Subscriptions dont bother me, I actually rather like them because it gets me so many titles for such a small price (MS Gamepass being a key one for that goodness). Problem might be worse in decades to come as you point out but I will be dead then so I dont care lol