Assassin's Creed: learning from the past to build a better future for the series

Nice make it twice as big as odyssey,and have thousands of collectables 😊

I played Origins and Odyssey, however to me they are not Assassin's Creed, that's why I keep playing Brotherhood (my favorite) and Revelation (X360), The Ezio Collection (just completed ACII, already completed on X360), Liberation HD, then I'll continue ACIII (X360 and Remastered) and start Rogue (X360 and remastered) and also Liberation remastered... and maybe I'll replay and get a few more achievements with Black Flag, Unity and Syndicate. I was hoping they would come back to the series root, with actual stealth gameplay over action rpg, sadly they won't... and I just will keep playing the old ones.

I've played all main AC titles, completed most of them. I'm really looking forward to Mirage going back to stealth kills like the earlier titles. I like the later games, but Valhalla is just too much brawling. I keep trying to get back into it, but it's not keeping my interest...sadly.

Gaxel said:I'd definitely agree that they have become two very different types of game...but IMO that's OK.
I do like the story and stealth focus in the original games but I've found that I've approached Origins, Odyssey and now Valhalla in a very different way. Valhalla has become my "pick up and play a time frame" type game where I will go in and just concentrate on either the next step of the quest, gathering the wealth in a region, etc. rather than attempting to play through the entire thing as quickly as possible.

I'll probably still be playing in a year's time LOL but it definitely prevents it from becoming a 'must complete it now' slog.

They literally took a franchise about stabbing people, turned it into a historical RPG and somehow made it WORSE with the latest addition. This lot ain't got a clue what AC is and they are the devs lmao.

I’m so hype for Mirage. Seems like the sequel I’ve been wanting ever since they made the switch up to giant RPGs🤞

I have to say I loved the originals but loved the last three just as much. In fact Valhalla is possibly my favourite. Looking at the new games mentioned Hexe looks more interesting to me. Love European folklore and landscapes.

Valhalla was a decent game with far, FAR too much fluff, and a lack of meaningful direction. There are some very nice, well-written moments, probably some of the best of the recent games, but there is so much filler, so much pointless busywork.

It's a decent 30 hour game stretched to 100 hours. I'm sure anyone that's played it would agree that half, maybe more of the regional stories have incredibly little bearing on the main story. I hope they learned from it that more content isn't always better. I'm hopeful for Mirage's smaller scope, but I'm sure no matter how well it sells, they'll go back to big, 100+ hour RPGs with little bearing on actual Assassin stuff and excessive filler.

Valhalla to me has been the worst of the 3, with Odyssey being the best as an overall experience.

Origins was to the point and I enjoyed the story.
Odyssey had intrigue, was beautiful and a fun setting, especially the dlc. (Shame about the loot system)
Valhalla had bad mechanics (raids), boring story, forgettable side characters, too many boring collectibles, a nerfed aerial companion, and just a blander protagonist as well.

Only things I've liked about Valhalla are the DoR dlc, the roguelike one, and the smack your Bishop side quest, that gave me a giggle.

My one and only real request for the new one would be, if you include ranged weapons, please just work out a way to "swap modes" instead of needing to equip four different bows. It's tedious. Or just stick with the hunter bow.

I think they should really tone down the mythological aspects in the games. In Valhalla, it felt like the Viking lore took too much attention from the actual historical components. In the old games, it was a treat to meet real life figures like Saladin, Niccolò Machiavelli, or Samuel Adams. We were engaged in superb recreations of famous time periods like the Third Crusade or the French Revolution. But with the latest entry we got...Charles the Fat? Oh, but we got lots of Thor in exchange. It felt like the developers went out of their way to dodge history in order to show more fictional characters (like seriously, where was Leif Erickson?)

As for the horse mechanics, don't mess with them. I despised riding the Red Dead Redemption 2 horses. It was a terrible pain to lose your horse, find it again, and get it to follow the darn road. If I had to travel less than a mile, I would just give up and leg it myself since it took less time. The horses in Odyssey, by comparison, were actually fun to ride.

VivaJerry said:To me Brotherhood and Revelations, on both x360 and The Ezio Collection versions, are the "pick up and play a time frame" type game (along NMS). I like just to explore the city, find some collectables, do some assassinations, renovations, etc and basically go to completition, remove all icons from the map.

Never played Valhalla. Origins it was fun at start then become tedious, Odyssey it was better, but because I played it with almost no hud, using just the description and the dialogues to find places and npcs for quests. It was fun to explore, but it wasn't an Assassin's Creed game.

Gaxel said:I started getting bored with Odyssey around hour 30, until a friend suggested I do exactly as you mention and play without the destination hints. It made it a lot more immersive and here I am now 223 hours of gameplay later.

I’m pretty fatigued with these games even though I enjoy them. Love the series. I wish they would get back to making 30-40 hour games without 782 collectibles and 10 dlc packs/updates… know not everyone wants that but here’s hoping for a well crafted, meaningful campaign with stealth combat options. I believe they have announced 4 AC projects currently unreleased, I’m feeling lucky.

The poll should actually be titled "how to make assassins creed a good game again"? assassins creed origins, odyssey and valhalla have good moments but they are games with a lot of useless content to extend the playing time : several equal bases based on copy and paste Generic side quests and collectibles that nobody cares about. the old games were shorter but they were original works, AC became a generic game far below the best open worlds in the industry like red dead 2 and the witcher 3.

ItsMancow said:I know what you mean. I would gladly take a 30/40 hour play through game with a great story line and, and narration that really gets you involved with the characters like Ezio and Leonardo than a game that takes 150 hours with just some ok dialogue and story that you can do in 60/70 hours and spend another 40 looking for stuff to clear the map

Although I enjoyed Valhalla, it was far too long. 120 hours in and I’ve still got the 4 main dlc packs to do. A lot of it was the same too with not much variety.

I wasn't a big fan of AC in the first place and gave up after Syndicate.

"Learning from the past" wouldn't be an issue if Ubi and others just LISTENED TO THE PEOPLE WHO BUY THEIR PRODUCTS instead of getting all mightier than thou about everything. I don't fault them for trying something new, but listen to the feedback from gamers who play your games, not investors who are blinded by profit or anyone else who's interest in their product solely stems from their gripes with society. These companies act like the key to success is a big secret, when all they gotta do is what people who actually purchase their products want. They need us more than we need them, they gotta get off their expensive thrones and start listening, simple as that.

Just create a beautiful game, rich graphics, immersive atmosphere and satisfying fluid combat like the ezio titles. And hopefully a series of stories. But there's no need for a massive open world with tons of collectibles if it's just gonna butcher what makes AC an actual AC game