Remember those iconic games before 2014? The OG, while dated was really unique for its time, the Ezio Auditore Trilogy that became the standard for the franchise, 3, that was very ambitious (probably too much) with it’s setting and story telling. Even 4, although it was the first time AC escaped from the base of what an assassin’s creed game is supposed to be.

Unity was the very first big misstep and since then the franchise has become unrecognisable, taking gameplay and mechanics from batman games and now went into unnecessarily long, repetitive and bloated RPGs than the real fans of the series couldn’t care less, especially since the core legacy mechanics of parkour and missions were gone. Not only that but they completely threw the modern day story on the trash since Desmond’s death…

AC was one of the last very original franchises a triple A company gave us and now is just a Witcher wannabe.

“Oh wth are you talking about, it sells well” sales doesn’t equal quality. The last games are such a step backwards for the series.

  • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Valhalla is oozing with personality. It’s freakin’ huge, beating out the amount of content in Odyssey. It’s not all great content, but it isn’t terrible. Even the DLC is huge.

      • Matomo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re completely in your right to think that. I’m also glad there’s an audience that thinks otherwise.

        • CYB3R@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          But is low quality, the acting got worse, the missions are more repetitive, the way the scenes are framed it’s bad, there’s barely motion capture scenes, now compare it with the scenes in AC3 or even brotherhood… Those look like high quality TV shows scenes.

          • Matomo@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            I prefer good gameplay are fun cutscenes. Both add value, but I preferred the newer games over the old ones, in terms of gameplay.

            This doesn’t mean either of us is wrong or right, simply that it’s okay to have different preferences.

          • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            Nederlands
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I remember all of them and honestly, actually no. Of the modern games, only in Odyssey was the acting a bit bad in that people would always do the same repetitive arm movements (lift arm, raise, even when angry, or sad, or it was exaggerated).

            You probably misremember the missions being repetitive. I dare you to play AC1, that one was real repetitive compared to literally everything after.

            • CYB3R@lemm.eeOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              You’re comparing an old 2007 (cutting edge for its time) game with a mediocre modern RPG. Keep that in mind. AC1 IS repetitive but is AC at it’s purest form. The parkour is amazing and it’s so cool to go back to a game without restrictions of movement, like real parkour.

              And the cut scenes part I was obviously talking about other games beyond 1. Is not fair to give that game crap, is the OG ffs. Still, the missions, social stealth and assassinations plus perfect parkour put it over the over bloated RPGs of now.

              • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                Nederlands
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Sure, it might be AC1 in its “purest” form, but that is because it’s just the first game, which sets the tone. I give it credit for doing that, but that’s it. I do recall that at the time it was received relatively lackluster.

                Exchange Odyssey with 1, correct for what the consoles and computers were capable for at the time, and you might say the same, that it would’ve been AC in its purest form, and nowadays it’s all underbloated and too poor, not rich in detail.

                Personally, I found the parkour in the first few games very boring. It certainly did have restrictions of movement. You could not climb outside city walls, or stones, or trees. May I remind you that games from III (when Desmond died) and on, actually started in that?

                I fear your memory might be selective, but no one is holding you back from playing the older games. I personally prefer the newer ones as they actually do have deeper stories.

                So, yes: I do give the first game crap, because it is not accessible for handicapped people (eg. a lack of good subtitles), and it was very glitchy (you could only attack the Lionheart when you pushed him through the corridor, when this was not intended gameplay). And all that, while it should have been accessible and less glitchy and repetitive, even compared to other games at the time.

                You simply have a rosy coloured view of the past, I’m afraid; try looking more rosy towards the future, be thankful, and there may be less reason for chagrin. Have a good evening.

                • CYB3R@lemm.eeOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  Again, there’s several YouTube videos proving otherwise. You can manual jump everywhere in that game. Odyssey and origins DON’T. Shit, odyssey erased the fall damage completely, you’re factually wrong.

                  Of course you CAN’T climb everywhere, that’s how real climbers work irl, on odyssey you can climb flat surfaces which is dumb and you don’t have side projections or vaulting. AC1, the old ass game you’re ridiculing does. Rose tinted my nutsack.