why is this gaming getting high praise? it is awful

[mcguireptr]

I just finished this last night; and I don't understand how this game got positive reviews and glowing comments.

As an assassin's creed game it is awful and lore breaking, as an RPG it fails the player character functionality, customization, and choice and consequences, as a large open world MMO style game it has no real life players to make the large scope interesting. As a general game it is poorly written internally and externally inconsistent with both real life history, AC lore, and even historical fiction genre instead turning into a pure fantasy. The dialogue is terrible and immersion breaking; the open world is huge dull lifeless and boring with constant examples of cut and paste jobs and extremely repetitive quests/tasks; the size and repetitiveness of the game make it a chore to get through. The quest design, level scaling and narrative order is a mess.

There is actually very few redeeming qualities about this game. I don't see how anyone that is any kind of a gamer can say this is good or some even going as far to say 'best RPG since Witcher 3' that is insane.

This video summarizes it nicely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCuXlPC6gsQ

[Zenith]

Publicado originalmente por J-&Dre:

I doubt the AC series will ever return to the format you liked.

It definitely won't, and to quote Wikipedia: Assassin's Creed: Valhalla sold more copies during its first week of release than any other Assassin's Creed game, and the PC version also had the most successful launch of any PC game published by Ubisoft.

The new formula is working very, very well. It may not be the AC of old, but it's selling, and selling ridiculously well.

[mcguireptr]

Publicado originalmente por Zenith:

Publicado originalmente por J-&Dre:

I doubt the AC series will ever return to the format you liked.

It definitely won't, and to quote Wikipedia: Assassin's Creed: Valhalla sold more copies during its first week of release than any other Assassin's Creed game, and the PC version also had the most successful launch of any PC game published by Ubisoft.

The new formula is working very, very well. It may not be the AC of old, but it's selling, and selling ridiculously well.

Yeah well that is how the corporate IP death cycle works. They will milk this series now that it has reached it's peak in terms of selling power; this is when the actual content starts to get worse and worse until they start losing consumers. Then they will go through a renewal, get a little bit of a boost and it will immediately go back to milking face until it dies. Then some time will go by and they will 'resurrect' it through some form of a reboot. If it works the cycle starts over again. If not it gets buried again until they try it again a bit later.

This is already exactly what happens with popular film franchises; now that the golden age of Gaming is over, that corporate IP death cycle is now in video games.

We can expect the gaming industry to be about as crap as hollywood is now.

[Sep]

I agree that barrel collection was the worst part of Witcher 3 but it was not so bad and didn't take so long as to 'ruin' the experience. And there was enough of a reward for it to not feel like a complete waste of time. But I can see how it might feel that way for some. But in terms of scale; Origins was worse for this, and Odyssey was way worse than Origins. So if we are comparing the scaling and the annoying grinding. Odyssey is by far worse then Witcher 3.

With the boat travel in each game; I actually did very little travel by boat in Odyssey; I think mentioned before I downloaded a cheat engine feature to teleport. So I could cover those great distances with one click. I didn't have that in Witcher 3 and I still feel like Odyssey was an absolute drag. Because at the end of that ? there was never anything unique or rewarding. In Witcher even with having to suffer through annoying barrels and travel there was a reward just often enough to make it feel worth it. I did occasionally get that in Odyssey sometimes would get a legendary ship sail or something; but man the ratio of useless to cool finds was bad.

No, is not. Ratio wise, it is equally as bad as Odyssey. In W3, there is a risk of the boat being destroy in a middle of nowhere thanks to the Siren and end up forcing you to swim for the next 5-15 minutes. Siren ain't a jokes when it comes to damaging the boat. While the same risk do exist in Odyssey, it also did't exist at same time. Mainly because it is your own stupidity if you travel to high sea with boat instead of using your Adrestia ship.

In the Witcher, gear comprise of 6 rarity. The only one worth to paid attention to is Witcher gear. Relic is a good start for the first 10 level but are quickly overwhelm as soon as you have a full set of even the lowest tier of Witcher gear. In Odyssey, epic gear is better than legendary gear since you can have extra 4 engraving in armor. If you don't understand this part, you can search in the forum for your answer.

Having a few RPG elements does not make the game an RPG. I was fine with them adding in some elements. Even in Odyssey i was okay with the gear customization options. my issue is Odyssey crossed the line and change the genre but ended up making a mediocre at best RPG.

As long as it involves a few rpg element, the game is already under the category of rpg. That's how a game was categorize with. Plus, there is no definite meaning of how many rpg element should be involves to be consider as rpg and vice versa.

If you look into how gaming industry categorize a game, this is normal occurance. Even if a game involves a bit of puzzle or strategy, it ain't a big shock to even see the tag labelling it as puzzle or strategy game.

Odyssey isn't crossing the line, the right choice of word would be expanding it. Gear customization and skills might be keep at a minimal in the past but that's not the case now.

Plus, how do you even want to define it was.... too rpg? Does it mean it was too rpg if it have 60+ skills to choose from instead of only having 20 skill to choose? Or being able to customize 600 gear is too rpg instead of only having 40 gear to customize?

Number varied according to individual. Maybe having over 60 skills to select from was consider to be too much in term of rpg for you, but for other like me, having as little as 10 skill to choose from is already consider as rpg. Do you get the point I am referring to?

It is not a bug, it is a feature. the game world was never designed to evolve based on outcomes to continuously return to default so you can get that 'never ending' experience.

No, is not. Ubisoft have the tedency not to fix those stuff due to either complexity or how time consuming it was. It would be easier for them just to declare it as a features since it doesn't break the game in any major way.

[VictoriousDK]

Publicado originalmente por mcguireptr:

Publicado originalmente por ODYSSEY-Aviation:

@j-&Dre
He just watched an youtube video, and thought he could spread the false information regarding the game. Odyssey is a great game with some flaws yes. but the videos this turtle watch is so far from the truth that even, saying 911 was anside job would be closer to a solid statement rather than saying of this game is bad, i dont know why but i watched this youtuber that thinks he knows alot but point out things that isn't even bad and the exact same as withcer III

Sorry for my rant on those rookies. it's just if you make a bad review or post like this do some research.

I fully support you @j-&Dre

Oh look another one that can't defend the game on merits and instead goes right to fallacies. Calling the guy a turtle and claiming his statements are ridiculous without explanation are non arguments. Ad homenim and Appeal to ridicule.

I don't agree with everyone of his points in the video; but I especially agree with his discussing of the repetative content, the poor character design, the lazy broken mess of a narrative structure and the piss poor job of tying it in with the main narrative of Assassin's Creed (something each title did a great job of even Origins which I didn't love).

What do you mean by "do some research" and you know calling my post bad is a form of dismissing my opinion without providing any reasoning or justification. That is, wait for it, another fallacy.

I am seeing a pattern among those that like Odyssey. You all can't explain why and you are frustrating by that fact when it is pointed out so you try to insult rather that defend your opinion.

If you can't defend your opinion, shut up and let someone who can argue for you. What you do with your nonarguments is just give me the validation I crave. I can dismiss anyone that likes the game as an idiot that hasn't thought very deeply about it, which means I am right, based on merit it is objectively bad game that successfully manipulated the lowest common denominator (that would be you, btw)

I was hoping to be proven wrong and that I was overtly critical on some of the points like the narrative structure or questing structure and maybe it was not as bad as I thought and there was something I missed. but instead I got confirmation that 'fan's opinions' are no more accurate then critics opinions.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!! this is gold man!

you are funny. keep up those jokes and we will keep laughing. Good one.

''Defend'' ''Denominator'' hahahhaha i like you man, wish you were older, then we could totally had been friends.

[VictoriousDK]

Publicado originalmente por J-&Dre:

Publicado originalmente por ODYSSEY-Aviation:

@j-&Dre
He just watched an youtube video, and thought he could spread the false information regarding the game. Odyssey is a great game with some flaws yes. but the videos this turtle watch is so far from the truth that even, saying 911 was anside job would be closer to a solid statement rather than saying of this game is bad, i dont know why but i watched this youtuber that thinks he knows alot but point out things that isn't even bad and the exact same as withcer III

Sorry for my rant on those rookies. it's just if you make a bad review or post like this do some research.

I fully support you @j-&Dre

Exactly. I also watched it and found his need for XP boost amusing, sounding as if this was a requirement to level up. Maybe if you only wanna do the main story but there is so much else to explore like the tombs, in which some of them have incredibly deep and well hidden tunnels for you to discover. An aspect I know they transferred from Origins but works well in Odyssey too.

Excatly, i've played for 100 hours without need to boost or buy anything, hell and i am even level 55. and completed all the things there are in the game.
He made it worse than it had to be,

yes character development could had been improven alot and the copy paste quest for the Athen and Sparta side could had been diverse, but it is a really good looking game i found alot of fun. It was really clear he dissliked it because it lacked the past titles mechanics. But i honestly think this is better what we got now. But calling it Assassins creed could had been changed maybe just to Odyssey.

All in all, for 100 hours straight i didn't use boosters, i didn't fast travel i didn't get bored, i really enjoyed it. after the short story line was complete for me (i had completed it all) i began using fast travel.

I would wish this guy that made this post, maybe had pointed out hes own things why he liked it. instead of taking a youtuber, that clearly made false claims to get views and likes.

But thanks for understanding and keep it up man.

[mcguireptr]

Publicado originalmente por ODYSSEY-Aviation:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!! this is gold man!

you are funny. keep up those jokes and we will keep laughing. Good one.

''Defend'' ''Denominator'' hahahhaha i like you man, wish you were older, then we could totally had been friends.

Another compelling defense of the merits of the game. Have you ever heard of "appeal to ridicule"? GOOGLE IT.

[mcguireptr]

Publicado originalmente por Silas:

No, is not. Ratio wise, it is equally as bad as Odyssey.

I am sorry but this is just not a true statement. comparing the barrel grind of W3 to the multiple forms of grind in Odyssey and saying they are equally bad, is just not true. Maybe if they were equal in volume it might be; but the fact is the grind of Oydssey dwarfs the grind in W3. Yes it is annoying to get your boat destroyed in W3; but it is equally annoying to get constant objective points 4000 meters apart throughout the entire game. And there is just as much traveling around on the boat collecting supplies and finding stuff; but the pay off is not nearly equal. I didn't love the barrels in W3 but it was not so much and didn't go on so long that it was 'game breaking' for me. But Odyssey had that same grind feeling throughout the entire experience.

As long as it involves a few rpg element, the game is already under the category of rpg. That's how a game was categorize with. Plus, there is no definite meaning of how many rpg element should be involves to be consider as rpg and vice versa.

If you look into how gaming industry categorize a game, this is normal occurance. Even if a game involves a bit of puzzle or strategy, it ain't a big shock to even see the tag labelling it as puzzle or strategy game.

This is absolutely wrong. The genre for literally every AC game until odyssey was Action-adventure. Odyssey is the first to be categorized as Action RPG. You are just factually wrong on this one. a few rpg elements a rpg game does not make. That would be like saying the Witcher 3 is a card game because it includes gwent within the game.

Odyssey isn't crossing the line, the right choice of word would be expanding it. Gear customization and skills might be keep at a minimal in the past but that's not the case now.

Plus, how do you even want to define it was.... too rpg? Does it mean it was too rpg if it have 60+ skills to choose from instead of only having 20 skill to choose? Or being able to customize 600 gear is too rpg instead of only having 40 gear to customize?

I guess what I mean by this is; they added a bunch of superficial shallow customization but the narrative, characters and arcs do not evolve; so it is missing all the elements that make an rpg experience actually meaningful. it did this weird in-between but did none of them particularly well. What does it matter if you can customize your armor if the story never really evolves? technicallay all games are like this but when executed well it creates an illusion of meaningfulness in your choices and playstyle. Odyssey comes across more like an MMO then a single player RPG. and I don't like MMO games either.

Number varied according to individual. Maybe having over 60 skills to select from was consider to be too much in term of rpg for you, but for other like me, having as little as 10 skill to choose from is already consider as rpg. Do you get the point I am referring to?

It is not a question of number of skills to select from; but what impact did selecting those have on the game itself? So what you can get 8 warrior active attacks if you only end up using 3 to 4 of them? Why have that many options if you don't do anything interesting with them. even just occasionally letting a dialogue option or outcome change based on your skills you picked. Most RPG games that have a dialogue option will do something like that. Witcher 3 does it only a few times in the game; but even just a few times makes it feel meaningful. The options in Odyssey never change and the outcome is always the same. I am sorry that makes it a bad RPG. Now that is fine; AC games were not RPG games even if they did put some RPG elements in . But Odyssey is also a bad AC game. It offers none of the depth of the Assassin vs Templar order. The cult is a dumb down evil for the sake of evil group that have literally zero development ( you get a 1 paragraph summary and zero interaction with almost all of them). It doesn't tie into the rest of the series very well; and when it does it is lazy and contradictory. So the in depth narrative of AC games is not as good in Odyssey. So it is not a good RPG (been done better elsewhere) and is also not a good AC game. so what kind of a game is it that makes it good. If it was an MMO that had real life players filling the boring repetitive environment it might be one of the best ever. But it is not; it is a single player game.

I
No, is not. Ubisoft have the tedency not to fix those stuff due to either complexity or how time consuming it was. It would be easier for them just to declare it as a features since it doesn't break the game in any major way.

This is false as well. You even admitted before that returning to default was a function of the game. no you are trying to say that it is a bug. so the conquest battles and the map switching who controls what region no matter what your activity as the mithios is, that is just a bug that didn't get worked out and not a function of the game? that is your argument here. I am sorry you are wrong. The world returning to default in this game is by design. Even the people that love this know that.

[Sep]

I am sorry but this is just not a true statement. comparing the barrel grind of W3 to the multiple forms of grind in Odyssey and saying they are equally bad, is just not true. Maybe if they were equal in volume it might be; but the fact is the grind of Oydssey dwarfs the grind in W3. Yes it is annoying to get your boat destroyed in W3; but it is equally annoying to get constant objective points 4000 meters apart throughout the entire game. And there is just as much traveling around on the boat collecting supplies and finding stuff; but the pay off is not nearly equal. I didn't love the barrels in W3 but it was not so much and didn't go on so long that it was 'game breaking' for me. But Odyssey had that same grind feeling throughout the entire experience.

Again, is not. Odyssey is bad but it doesn't have the risk of consuming your time thanks to the destruction of your transportation.

Objective that are even 4km apart is not a problem because you have synchronize point that you can use to get as close as possible to it. The furthest most of those collectible, camp and etc that I have to travel between it and synchronize point is at most is 1KM which is easily traverse thanks to transporation like horse and ship.

If I don't have fast travel to any objective that are within 1km of it, it just means I have yet to discover the area.

At W3, nearly 70-90% of those barrel location have siren meaning your transportation is always exposed to siren destruction. There is no fast travel point between most barrel and you cannot fast travel on sea when your boat is destroy. You are then force to swim for the next 5-15 minutes. Barrel features in the W3 is soo bad that if not because of Hearth of Stone dlc and Gwent mini games, I would have given the game a negative feedback.

In Odyssey, dead horse can be re-summon and there is even a free horse that are immune to fall off damage. Adrestia is only destroy if you engage with enemy on sea and boat only destroy if you are stupid enough to travel to sea with it.

I have clocked in 211 hours in W3 by the time I finish everything and currently at 240 hours in Odyssey while still doing the final part of the game (Atlantis dlc). In that 211 hours, I spend most of it for barrel and if the gap of time playing is 30-50 hours, it is clearly evident that it is just as bad as the grinding in Odyssey.

Again, if you are telling me is not. Then try play rpg game without using fast travel and any mode of transportation. Having your boat destroy in a middle of nowhere in the sea, that's exactly how it feels like.

This is absolutely wrong. The genre for literally every AC game until odyssey was Action-adventure. Odyssey is the first to be categorized as Action RPG. You are just factually wrong on this one. a few rpg elements a rpg game does not make. That would be like saying the Witcher 3 is a card game because it includes gwent within the game.

No, is not. A game can be tag with multiple genre but for the sake of convenience, they would usually stick to only 2-3. Even if you go to wiki to check out game, those article would just basically tag it with 1 or 2 genre. It would be insane to literally list down the entire genre down to every miniscule.

If you look at those store in steam, they have popular user-defined tags for the product where the user define the product and they only list the popular one cause it would be too much to include the least popular tag.

I guess what I mean by this is; they added a bunch of superficial shallow customization but the narrative, characters and arcs do not evolve; so it is missing all the elements that make an rpg experience actually meaningful. it did this weird in-between but did none of them particularly well. What does it matter if you can customize your armor if the story never really evolves? technicallay all games are like this but when executed well it creates an illusion of meaningfulness in your choices and playstyle. Odyssey comes across more like an MMO then a single player RPG. and I don't like MMO games either.

I have no idea why you want to drag customization into story, it sounds stupid and basically a silly attempt to undermine the quality of the game in every possible way to justify your point of your view.

Being able to customize or equip your gear or ability however you want have no correlation to a good story. Gears and ability is relate to gameplay, not story. A good story doesn't even need to have gear nor ability to push it off.

Even in older AC we have ton's of different gear with different stats. So do I have to consider it as "way too rpg" cause of it?

It is not a question of number of skills to select from; but what impact did selecting those have on the game itself? So what you can get 8 warrior active attacks if you only end up using 3 to 4 of them?

Ahhh.. so you are the kind that only stick to 3-4 skills.

Sorry to say that, but you only can blame your habit of playing the game that way. Not everybody is gonna stick to 3-4 skills like you did.

Why have that many options if you don't do anything interesting with them. even just occasionally letting a dialogue option or outcome change based on your skills you picked. Most RPG games that have a dialogue option will do something like that. Witcher 3 does it only a few times in the game; but even just a few times makes it feel meaningful. The options in Odyssey never change and the outcome is always the same. I am sorry that makes it a bad RPG.

That's probably the worst excuse to label a game a bad rpg. If that's how you label it, nearly every rpg game in existence is a bad game cause not every rpg game have same format.

Just because the recent AC trying to emulate W3, it doesn't mean it have to copy everything Witcher related down to every single details.

This is false as well. You even admitted before that returning to default was a function of the game. no you are trying to say that it is a bug. so the conquest battles and the map switching who controls what region no matter what your activity as the mithios is, that is just a bug that didn't get worked out and not a function of the game? that is your argument here. I am sorry you are wrong. The world returning to default in this game is by design. Even the people that love this know that.

The regional control switching between Sparta & Athen power isn't a bug. It was even mention in the loading screen itself. Unless your game load insanely fast or you just plainly ignore it, there is a text message mention there. The only region that doesn't switch control was Attika and Lakonia (Or was it Messedonia? Cannot remember) because it was the capital.

On the other hand, being a huntress leader by choice yet encroaching into huntress territory still mark as being in hostile territory and require you to kill huntress leader to complete the objective of the area is simply a indication of bug.

[mcguireptr]

dude; you are actively contradicting yourself. This is getting tiresome.

Publicado originalmente por Silas:

At W3, nearly 70-90% of those barrel location have siren meaning your transportation is always exposed to siren destruction. There is no fast travel point between most barrel and you cannot fast travel on sea when your boat is destroy. You are then force to swim for the next 5-15 minutes. Barrel features in the W3 is soo bad that if not because of Hearth of Stone dlc and Gwent mini games, I would have given the game a negative feedback.

okay I know you are not being intellectual honest now. You picked the barrels example as a complaint from Witcher 3 and so far that is your ONLY complaint of only one single element of that game. Where as my complaint of Odyssey is the ENITER game was a grind , boring tedious and repetitive throughout the entire map and within nearly every quest or task.

In Odyssey, dead horse can be re-summon and there is even a free horse that are immune to fall off damage. Adrestia is only destroy if you engage with enemy on sea and boat only destroy if you are stupid enough to travel to sea with it.

Seriously do you have any other complaint about Witcher 3 except the barrels? is the story bad, is the consequences feature bad, does the story and world not evolve as the story progresses? You know, the things that make a good RPG experience that odyssey was totally lacking? is there fun mini games such as fist fighting or as you point out the gwent minigame? remind me, What minigames does Odyssey have? oh that is right, there was none.

I have clocked in 211 hours in W3 by the time I finish everything and currently at 240 hours in Odyssey while still doing the final part of the game (Atlantis dlc). In that 211 hours, I spend most of it for barrel and if the gap of time playing is 30-50 hours, it is clearly evident that it is just as bad as the grinding in Odyssey.

If you spent 30 to 50 hours on the barrels you did something very wrong. that is a 5 to 8 hour max; maybe 10 hours if you play on nightmare. but again do you have any other complain of W3? Does the grind experience with the barrels appear in ANY OTHER PART OF THE GAME? you comparison is totally egregious.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong mind you. But if your opinion is being that influenced by one aspect of the game; while at the same time you are trying to argue against my complaints of the every apect of another game, you are just being intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite.

Again, if you are telling me is not. Then try play rpg game without using fast travel and any mode of transportation. Having your boat destroy in a middle of nowhere in the sea, that's exactly how it feels like.

Again the barrels were only 1 part of the and a relative small part at that. why are you obsessing so much over that 1 thing. I am not obsessing over 1 thing in Odyssey my complaint is the entire experience was filled with grind and boring repetitive gameplay, gameplay that had no real payoff i'll say it again, this is not a fair or accurate comparison.

No, is not. A game can be tag with multiple genre but for the sake of convenience, they would usually stick to only 2-3. Even if you go to wiki to check out game, those article would just basically tag it with 1 or 2 genre. It would be insane to literally list down the entire genre down to every miniscule.

Don't be stupid now. Games have a official genre/categories. You can look it up. Officially ALL assassin's creeds games until Odyssey were not in the official category of RPG. You know this is true, stop doubling down on a false statement. I did check it out on wiki and a few other sites including Ubisolfts home page. All AC games until Odyssey are action adventure, officially.

II have no idea why you want to drag customization into story, it sounds stupid and basically a silly attempt to undermine the quality of the game in every possible way to justify your point of your view.

Being able to customize or equip your gear or ability however you want have no correlation to a good story. Gears and ability is relate to gameplay, not story. A good story doesn't even need to have gear nor ability to push it off.

Even in older AC we have ton's of different gear with different stats. So do I have to consider it as "way too rpg" cause of it?

WTF are you talking about, that is my complaint. having some superficial surface level customization options does not make up for bad story or bad superficial characters. And AC Odyssey does not have a good story or well written compelling characters (at least not compared to other AC games) It is horribly written with internal and external inconsistency, bad dialogue, and a choice and consequence feature that has absolutely no real reward or punishment system built in. my point is; so what if you get some RPG customization features if the main story is badly written.

Ahhh.. so you are the kind that only stick to 3-4 skills.

Sorry to say that, but you only can blame your habit of playing the game that way. Not everybody is gonna stick to 3-4 skills like you did.

Nope, i am not someone that sticks to 3 or 4 skills in my RPG. I am a pc gamer and used to having 10 and using 10 skills at a time. The problem is the ability wheel of Odyssey is so horribly designed it becomes a huge inconvenience to try ti rotate the skills because you can't do it on the fly.

That's probably the worst excuse to label a game a bad rpg. If that's how you label it, nearly every rpg game in existence is a bad game cause not every rpg game have same format.

More intellectual dishonest I see. My complaint was a single example to support my argument that the entire experience was meaningless. i am trying to provide details for my more general claim but you take that then you misattribute my single detail to ridicule the general complaint. that is fallicious and dishonest bad faith arguing.

My complaint is there is no actual consequence for ANY decision or play style in the game. The choices are absolutely superficial and meaningless. here is another example (to support my general argument) Perhaps the 'biggest' choice system of the game is the outcome of your family. The reward is different 1 minute dinner cutscene depending on the outcome. then you can use them as ship leutentants and that is it. nothing more; they are not involved in any future quests; you can't ever interact with them again. You can't go back to you home or customize it or build anything up (like you could do in almost every AC game up until Origins). Remember in ACII you could keep and build up a Vineyard? Or how about AC Black Flag when you could build up your own pirate town. Those weren't even RPG games but offered more payoff for your efforts then anything in Odyssey

The world doesn't recognize the change, the future stories do not, the dlc do no acknowledge neither do any of the side quests. Don't believe me? well if you finished the family quest before doing the lost tales of greece dlc quests some of the questlines involving the cult are still active even if you already beat them and there is still references to Diemos even if you already killed or saved them. It is a freaking mess.

And don't try to claim those are bugs. Those were DLC you paid for that came out after the game was released. If those are just 'innocent' bugs then you should never give Ubisolft another dime because they are incompetent.

Just because the recent AC trying to emulate W3, it doesn't mean it have to copy everything Witcher related down to every single details.

It shouldn't have emulated it at all if it was going to do a superficially shallow, lazy ass job.

The regional control switching between Sparta & Athen power isn't a bug. It was even mention in the loading screen itself. Unless your game load insanely fast or you just plainly ignore it, there is a text message mention there.

Dude YOU WERE THE ONE MAKING THE ARGUMENT THAT IT WAS A BUG THAT UBI DIDN'T FIX. Now you are explaining the feature to me as I just explained it to you. Are you like insane or something? do you have multiple personalities? is english not your first language. You claimed regional control was a bug not me dumb ass. go back and re-read our conversation more carefully.

My entire point was no matter what you do, no matter what your activity is, no matter how much effort you put into helping athens or sparta; the regional control with switch back to going back and forth. you actively cannot boost the regional defense power of the side you want to support. It only ever goes down if you attach forts/camps of that region even if it is the side you want to help. and if you ignore it for a while because you are focused on other things; the entire regions control can switch. They almost always go back to a default of about balanced power between the two states and do so very quickly, like every 3 to 5 hours of in game time. The perfect example of why this is a badly lazy system if look at the region of Boeotia, even after you do "The Conqueror" questline to take it, there was no lasting impact, the region can go back to Athenian control in about 10 hours (which is what happened to me). Making the "conquest" for sparta utterly meaningless.
That was a lazy system.

On the other hand, being a huntress leader by choice yet encroaching into huntress territory still mark as being in hostile territory and require you to kill huntress leader to complete the objective of the area is simply a indication of bug.

B.S. it is not a bug it is a feature of the game that they didn't account for the in game choice you make to become the leader. No choices you make actually have in world consequences the camps, terrorizes, hostilities, etc WILL NEVER CHANGE based on what you are doing. this makes your actions in the game utterly,... wait for it, what is the word I keep using? oh yes MEANINGLESS.

it is a game that is shallow, superficial lazy, repetitive, mind numbingly grindy, unnecessarily dragged out, long and padded with boring tasks; lazily written side quests and utterly meaningless choice system. combine that with the overall story being subpar by AC game standards, and absolutely atrocious uncanny as hell unisex dialogue; made this one of the worst gaming experiences I have ever had.

I really cannot believe you defend this game while riding Witcher 3's ass about the barrels; man think just a little bit more about how ridiculous that is when you get past your own subjectivity and weigh actual quality.

[Sep]

okay I know you are not being intellectual honest now. You picked the barrels example as a complaint from Witcher 3 and so far that is your ONLY complaint of only one single element of that game. Where as my complaint of Odyssey is the ENITER game was a grind , boring tedious and repetitive throughout the entire map and within nearly every quest or task.

Seriously do you have any other complaint about Witcher 3 except the barrels? is the story bad, is the consequences feature bad, does the story and world not evolve as the story progresses? You know, the things that make a good RPG experience that odyssey was totally lacking? is there fun mini games such as fist fighting or as you point out the gwent minigame? remind me, What minigames does Odyssey have? oh that is right, there was none.

If you spent 30 to 50 hours on the barrels you did something very wrong. that is a 5 to 8 hour max; maybe 10 hours if you play on nightmare. but again do you have any other complain of W3? Does the grind experience with the barrels appear in ANY OTHER PART OF THE GAME? you comparison is totally egregious.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong mind you. But if your opinion is being that influenced by one aspect of the game; while at the same time you are trying to argue against my complaints of the every apect of another game, you are just being intellectually dishonest and a hypocrite.

I only pick the barrel because it was the worst of the worst. Do I have to list out everything down to miniscule to justify it? I even mention how poor the scaling system is, or do you forgotten about it? I did mention in my previous post that I play with scaling on, but have to turn it off when dealing with some boss due to it being a bullet sponge especially dlc boss.

And thanks for remind me of the fist fighting, one of the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ quest in witcher game. Fist fighting is pretty bad part of witcher as well. When the champion can literally destroy you in 2 hit while you have to inflict 10 times the amount of punch just to take him down, even though you are basically combat oriented build.

It also basically a quest that force one to have Undying skills. Without, it was practically a pain in the ass to deal with since blocking or dodging the attack doesn't even work sometimes.

Plus, fist fighting is a quest rather than a mini game. The mini game is gwent card. If you consider fist fighting as mini game rather than quest, then Odyssey Ostrakas is also consider as mini game.

Just read what Corvah wrote in reddit, it perfectly summed up a lot of issues in W3.

https://www.reddit.com/r/witcher/comments/86g8ff/biggest_balance_issues_in_the_game/

Don't be stupid now. Games have a official genre/categories. You can look it up. Officially ALL assassin's creeds games until Odyssey were not in the official category of RPG. You know this is true, stop doubling down on a false statement. I did check it out on wiki and a few other sites including Ubisolfts home page. All AC games until Odyssey are action adventure, officially.

Like I said, they are not in obligation to list out the entire list a game could possibly cover unless it was a requirement to do so.

For example, game like Serious Sam is first person shooter but it also have 3rd person features. But do you see the wiki label is as 3rd person shooter?

If they list all the category, it can literally fall into more than 10-20 section.

WTF are you talking about, that is my complaint. having some superficial surface level customization options does not make up for bad story or bad superficial characters. And AC Odyssey does not have a good story or well written compelling characters (at least not compared to other AC games) It is horribly written with internal and external inconsistency, bad dialogue, and a choice and consequence feature that has absolutely no real reward or punishment system built in. my point is; so what if you get some RPG customization features if the main story is badly written.

That was under the pretext if only main story involves which I agree was poorly written. But not for all side quest. Alkibiades is one of the rare character that was well potray and written.

But from what you been saying for awhile, you are basically implying that not just the main story, but all side quest was equally bad as well.

I also won't be going around saying there is no reward and punishment either. Like the choice of sparing or killing Deimos do have a reward. Having Deimos as liutenant is a plus considering how op it was. If you don't consider that as reward, I don't know what you want then.

Dude YOU WERE THE ONE MAKING THE ARGUMENT THAT IT WAS A BUG THAT UBI DIDN'T FIX. Now you are explaining the feature to me as I just explained it to you. Are you like insane or something? do you have multiple personalities? is english not your first language. You claimed regional control was a bug not me dumb ass. go back and re-read our conversation more carefully.

#27
#30
#35
#36
#38
#63
#93
#98

I been looking at my post #27, #30, #35, #36, #38, #63, #93, and #98 respectively, nowhere did I mention anything about region switching leadership being a bug.

If you refer to #98, it was you who ask about it at post #97

so the conquest battles and the map switching who controls what region no matter what your activity as the mithios is, that is just a bug that didn't get worked out and not a function of the game?

Read my reply at #98 carefully again.

The regional control switching between Sparta & Athen power isn't a bug. It was even mention in the loading screen itself.

Read what I underline, read back my post #98. There is a huge difference of "is a bug" and "isn't a bug".

[rui.silva.incp]

My friends....

I own both games.

W3 is an older game and still sells. It still has more players on line now and then vs Odyssey.

By the way, this is why Ubisoft are so desperate to copy it lol

Problem is.....Ubisoft does not have the same writing team. And by far!!!!!!

Also, to anyone even comparing worlds. W3 has cities which look unique. White Orchard, Velen, Skellige, all have very different vibes. You walk around the world and you find original structures everywhere. Attention to detail is mind blowing. Its precisely why it became famous.

To even compare Odyssey to that...............

You are either an Ubisoft employee or delusional lol

That being said, Odyssey is a nice enough game. Its not a bad game by far. Not at all. I doubt its worth its full price and I get seriously disgusted by the amount of money they are trying to squeeze from us with the boosts. But the base game is good enough to play and have fun with it.

Its just.....in 10 years or 20 years, Odyssey will not be remembered. It will be just one more game in its genre. It is what it is.