Ubisoft boss says it knows players think it has an 'inconsistency in quality,' so it delayed Assassin's Creed Shadows to flip that script (www.pcgamer.com)

submitted 12 hours ago by Rider@eviltoast.org to c/games@lemmy.world

52 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Sundial@lemm.ee 6 points 11 hours ago

Odyssey was pretty dam good in my opinion.

[-] guylacaptivite@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 hours ago

It was. Most of it's criticism comes from the fact that it's not really an assassin's creed game anymore. It was mostly far cry: ancient greece

[-] Sundial@lemm.ee 2 points 10 hours ago

Which is not a really good criticism in my opnion. It still had a lot of the core elements of AC, they just tried some new things. And a lot of it worked out.

[-] guylacaptivite@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

Agreed. As a game it was one of the best Ubi has done maybe ever imo.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

I enjoyed Origins, Odyssey just felt so... empty. I couldn't bring myself to do the post-game content I was so bored with it. I got to the Medusa and just... stopped. Have no desire to go back to it.

[-] Sundial@lemm.ee 2 points 8 hours ago

I enjoyed Origins as well. To me Odyssey was a more refined version of Origins. Better exploration, combat, etc. Odyssey focused more on exploration which is maybe why you felt it was more empty? I enjoyed it personally but it's definitely a preference thing.

[-] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 hours ago

There was definitely more exploration but all the "dungeons" were just cookie cutter copy/paste sections from what I remember, Origins at least had some unique puzzles