Assassin's Creed Valhalla Review - The RPG Files | MMORPG.com

System · November 2020

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Review - The RPG Files | MMORPG.com

Assasin's Creed Valhalla has been out for a little over a week, and Bradford has finally finished his romp through Viking-age England. So how does the experience fare? Here is our full review.

Read the full story here

foxgirl · November 2020

Only out a week and you're already done. How do you enjoy games that fast... it's like swallowing food whole. lol

SaltyDog79 · November 2020

foxgirl said:

Only out a week and you're already done. How do you enjoy games that fast... it's like swallowing food whole. lol

My guess is either he got it early or he had a deadline for this article, so he had to play it fast lol XD.

seshses · November 2020

Alot of reviewers get copies earlier they just cant talk about it ( embargo ) so too say

Pher0cious · November 2020

foxgirl said:

Only out a week and you're already done. How do you enjoy games that fast... it's like swallowing food whole. lol

He skipped all the grind, stabbed himself in the heart and went straight to Valhalla.

lotrlore · November 2020

Pher0cious said:

foxgirl said:

Only out a week and you're already done. How do you enjoy games that fast... it's like swallowing food whole. lol

He skipped all the grind, stabbed himself in the heart and went straight to Valhalla.

I actually had this a week before launch for the purposes of this review. I had actually planned on having this done by last Friday, but the more I played, the more I realized just how long the story was going to be.

I actually played the way I would have otherwise, though. I typically beeline the stories in open-world games and then doing the side stuff after. Thankfully, because Valhalla is so story focused and the side stuff are small vignettes as opposed to legnthy quest chains, I was able to do both in the 69 hours and some change I put into this review.

Though, stabbing myself and going straight to Valhalla would have been easier I suppose.

Kratier · November 2020

im 90 hours in and still not finished with the main story, you definitely skipped most the grind
i would not give this a 9, either. The whole game becomes mentally exhausting. I would say there is atleast 40+ more hours of collectible farming and how tedious the collectibles are to get, makes it even worse. Everything is either locked, or there is rubble blocking the path, or doors are barred.
I really liked the AC franchise, and vikings setting is what i really wanted, before it was revealed. But man, they don't do much with the setting or lore. Most the "improvements" they made aren't fleshed out or serve a meaningful purpose. Like the settlement, or the ship companions just standing around randomly in the open world.
i recommend anyone to just wait for a sale, or some time, there are better games out, or coming out soon that are more worth your time like demons souls or cyberpunk.
Valhalla is more of a game you play during a long lull between releases, and not sacrificing your time on some very unfulfilling time sinks this game demands.

Asheram · November 2020

Kratier said:

im 90 hours in and still not finished with the main story, you definitely skipped most the grind
i would not give this a 9, either. The whole game becomes mentally exhausting. I would say there is atleast 40+ more hours of collectible farming and how tedious the collectibles are to get, makes it even worse. Everything is either locked, or there is rubble blocking the path, or doors are barred.
I really liked the AC franchise, and vikings setting is what i really wanted, before it was revealed. But man, they don't do much with the setting or lore. Most the "improvements" they made aren't fleshed out or serve a meaningful purpose. Like the settlement, or the ship companions just standing around randomly in the open world.
i recommend anyone to just wait for a sale, or some time, there are better games out, or coming out soon that are more worth your time like demons souls or cyberpunk.
Valhalla is more of a game you play during a long lull between releases, and not sacrificing your time on some very unfulfilling time sinks this game demands.

lol 90 hours damn I am still at 30.

Sovrath · November 2020

Kratier said:

im 90 hours in and still not finished with the main story, you definitely skipped most the grind
i would not give this a 9, either. The whole game becomes mentally exhausting. I would say there is atleast 40+ more hours of collectible farming and how tedious the collectibles are to get, makes it even worse. Everything is either locked, or there is rubble blocking the path, or doors are barred.
I really liked the AC franchise, and vikings setting is what i really wanted, before it was revealed. But man, they don't do much with the setting or lore. Most the "improvements" they made aren't fleshed out or serve a meaningful purpose. Like the settlement, or the ship companions just standing around randomly in the open world.
i recommend anyone to just wait for a sale, or some time, there are better games out, or coming out soon that are more worth your time like demons souls or cyberpunk.
Valhalla is more of a game you play during a long lull between releases, and not sacrificing your time on some very unfulfilling time sinks this game demands.

I'm absolutely loving it. It's wonderful. Not perfect but no game is.

And I won't be doing "collectibles." Why? That stuff is for people who like that. If you don't like it don't do it.

In any case, if one like Assassin't Creed Odyseey then they might like this. I think it was money well spent.

Kratier · November 2020

im talking about time, not money. a more valuable resource, this game doesn't value your time.
and with better games worth your time, i recommend playing them currently over this, because it is time better spent.

Asheram · November 2020

Kratier said:

im talking about time, not money. a more valuable resource, this game doesn't value your time.
and with better games worth your time, i recommend playing them currently over this, because it is time better spent.

Well I have spent more "time" in this iteration of assassins creed games so for me its money well spent.

UnrealRpg · November 2020

The series as a whole is mentally exhausting. Anything modern day never seems like it goes any where and its just another STAY TUNED for the next game.

YashaX · November 2020

It has an interesting story, good characters, and beautifully depicted environments (Ubisoft's artists are just amazing), but the game mechanics are a major step down from Odyssey.

It feels to me like they needed a bit more time to tweak the combat and stealth mechanics, and properly integrate the new kill camera and slowdowns during assassinations. After 40 hours or so I have mostly stopped exclaiming "this is bullshit" in every fight or assassination attempt and now mainly just roll my eyes or laugh at how janky it all is.

I am not convinced that the soundtrack is as good as this reviewer makes it out to be: I have played it everyday for hours since it launched and sitting here typing now all I can recall is the epic soundtrack from Odyssey.

There is also a lot of weird level design: I have come across many forts and structures that have rooms with no proper entrances, for some reason there are unclimbable areas everywhere, a lack of entrances to structures (compared to previous titles), and an extreme overuse of locking objectives behind doors that need to be blown up or broken from the inside, among other things.

There are other janky and weird parts to the game, I should probably write a book about it one day, but despite all that I still can't wait to get back into the game and see what is in store for Eivor next. I just wish the combat was a little bit tighter and the stealth gameplay actually worked properly, sigh.

Scot · November 2020

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

[Deleted User] · November 2020

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Scot · November 2020

blueturtle13 said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

I don't agree with any of this.

Ok Blueturtle, but you usually give some reasons for your position.

dlld · November 2020

Im about 50 hours in and still quite far from completing it, guessing i will be landing on 100+ hours unless i get tired of it but so far I haven't.

It's the first game in quite a while i can play for 2+ hours without feeling exhausted/bored and needing to do something else despite a big chunk of my time spent hunting down the dots on the map (100% cleared the first five or so zones in england).

So unlike watchdogs I don't regret buying this game and will most likely get upcoming dlc for it.

laserit · November 2020

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Sovrath · November 2020

laserit said:

I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

I looked at the store for Odyssey and this game and Odyessy had more interesting skins but a good many were gimmicky. With Valhalla, I don't think any are good and one is just ridiculous (that pony rainbow one.)

Scot · November 2020

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

laserit · November 2020

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

What your describing is basically the way of the world. We could talk about the latest drip coffee maker or the latest air fryer and your analysis would ring just as true.

People copy good ideas (good ideas aren't always good for the consumer

), always have and always will.

Scot · November 2020

laserit said:

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

What your describing is basically the way of the world. We could talk about the latest drip coffee maker or the latest air fryer and your analysis would ring just as true.

People copy good ideas (good ideas aren't always good for the consumer ), always have and always will.

Sure, but I put it to you that games are art, both in story, gameplay and graphics. If the manufacturer of your excellent coffee maker takes an idea from the manufacturer of my excellent coffee maker and visa versa, we are going to be really pleased with the next coffee maker we get. We can use that coffee maker again and again and its features will never seem boring.

But do that to gaming and banality creeps in, even if all the features are very good. And even for you some features, like getting ever easier have gone too far. It is the same as with the WoW template, gaming indeed entertainment needs diversity, not one size fits all.

Sovrath · November 2020

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

What your describing is basically the way of the world. We could talk about the latest drip coffee maker or the latest air fryer and your analysis would ring just as true.

People copy good ideas (good ideas aren't always good for the consumer ), always have and always will.

Sure, but I put it to you that games are art, both in story, gameplay and graphics. If the manufacturer of your excellent coffee maker takes an idea from the manufacturer of my excellent coffee maker and visa versa, we are going to be really pleased with the next coffee maker we get. We can use that coffee maker again and again and its features will never seem boring.

But do that to gaming and banality creeps in, even if all the features are very good. And even for you some features, like getting ever easier have gone too far. It is the same as with the WoW template, gaming indeed entertainment needs diversity, not one size fits all.

Yeah, but this has always been done.

Heck, there was a time when borrowing from other artists was just part of it all. It wasn't until the, what? Mid to late 19th century that suddenly the idea if being individual was really a thing.

Most artists (no matter the genre) made their work in whatever the current style was for the time.

And even in current times, artists tend to copy and hopefully iterate on what is popular or inspiring.

But go back through history, you will find artists taking from others and either blatantly copying or trying to make it their own.

Scot · November 2020

Sovrath said:

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

What your describing is basically the way of the world. We could talk about the latest drip coffee maker or the latest air fryer and your analysis would ring just as true.

People copy good ideas (good ideas aren't always good for the consumer ), always have and always will.

Sure, but I put it to you that games are art, both in story, gameplay and graphics. If the manufacturer of your excellent coffee maker takes an idea from the manufacturer of my excellent coffee maker and visa versa, we are going to be really pleased with the next coffee maker we get. We can use that coffee maker again and again and its features will never seem boring.

But do that to gaming and banality creeps in, even if all the features are very good. And even for you some features, like getting ever easier have gone too far. It is the same as with the WoW template, gaming indeed entertainment needs diversity, not one size fits all.

Yeah, but this has always been done.

Heck, there was a time when borrowing from other artists was just part of it all. It wasn't until the, what? Mid to late 19th century that suddenly the idea if being individual was really a thing.

Most artists (no matter the genre) made their work in whatever the current style was for the time.

And even in current times, artists tend to copy and hopefully iterate on what is popular or inspiring.

But go back through history, you will find artists taking from others and either blatantly copying or trying to make it their own.

Indeed, but it is what we do with games, how they entertain us that is different. You don't spend four hours grinding with a Gauguin, this is more similar to our relationship to films. Films can be seen as being too generic, that's the trap gaming has been falling into for so long. It is impossible to totally avoid, it is partly the nature of a game that we see repetition. But that can be said for films or literature, it is not a virtue there, so I don't see why it is a virtue in gaming.

This is all a matter of scale, the degree of convergence. Having crafting in Far Cry does not make it have the same gameplay as AC, this is a process not an absolute we have already arrived at. Just take one example, the bow is great as a weapon, has its own unique feel, I love using them as my avatar suggests. But does every game be it fantasy, SF or modern age have to have them, that's the way we are headed? Too much of a good thing makes it become the same old gameplay as the years go by.

laserit · November 2020

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

laserit said:

Scot said:

Few games are worth a 9.0, so I doubt it is that good, though it is worth buying if you can stomach the bland changes to make it like every other adventure game. But what are you buying, as one reviewer said "what is an Assassin’s Creed game?". Well it is not what it used to be and to me it seems constructed from a potpourri of "successful elements in adventure games from the past few years". It had lost the sense of being an AC game by the time of Origins, since then it has drifted further into being an "adventure game for everyman".

This directional force in gaming is leading us into a one size fits all approach. Soon the only difference between an AC, SoM, Far Cry and the rest will be their setting. The feel of the gameplay and the gameplay activities are merging into one.

The fact each iteration is easier than the past is really just part of that, nearly all action games are easy, that's the sort of game we have been fed for so long we think super easy is normal.

That has to be bad in the long run for gaming, players will tire of the same old mechanics, more and more will not even bother to finish the game. In fact lets face it this has been the direction gaming has gone in for nearly a couple of decades and AC has just succumbed to the marketing men.

AC, SoM

I love both franchises and there are definite similarities. Almost all of the similarities though originated with AC.

FarCry? I don't know how that even gets thrown in. Its a story driven first person shooter. Nothing in common with AC and if we're thinking climbing towers that uncover maps, well that mechanic originated in the very first AC.

My biggest criticism of Valhalla is that I think it's a little too easy, you are far too powerful, that is what I think AC took from SoM. I also think the microtransactions of the last three incarnations are stupid but in their defense there is absolutely no reason in the world why you would ever need to make a purchase.

Well it has been a direction of travel for decades, some games conform more than others. It also has to be said that what they think optimal gameplay is for an "action adventure" must be always under review. Something like the nemesis system comes along and gaming companies are all thinking how much of that do we want to bring into the next iteration of our franchise? It is not that they are always making the wrong decisions (except for the likes of ever easier) the problem is that they are always thinking about bringing in gameplay we see from other successful games.

That's what leads to uniformity. Crafting in Far Cry is something they brought in from other games, I did not pick the best examples of what I am talking about, I don't think there are any "best examples". All games in this genre show a merging of gameplay ideas, though some more than others. The fact that there are any similarities between "story driven first person shooter" and a story driven action adventure, show you how the gaming template is merging.

The microtransactions are symptomatic of the current gaming business model, you must have them, no matter how much sense they make. But as time goes on I doubt they will remain so unnecessary. When have you ever seen a cash shop that does not become abusive, though they have been like this for quite a few iterations to their credit, I hope they prove me wrong.

What your describing is basically the way of the world. We could talk about the latest drip coffee maker or the latest air fryer and your analysis would ring just as true.

People copy good ideas (good ideas aren't always good for the consumer ), always have and always will.

Sure, but I put it to you that games are art, both in story, gameplay and graphics. If the manufacturer of your excellent coffee maker takes an idea from the manufacturer of my excellent coffee maker and visa versa, we are going to be really pleased with the next coffee maker we get. We can use that coffee maker again and again and its features will never seem boring.

But do that to gaming and banality creeps in, even if all the features are very good. And even for you some features, like getting ever easier have gone too far. It is the same as with the WoW template, gaming indeed entertainment needs diversity, not one size fits all.

Designing, prototyping, manufacturing is an art too. Games are entertainment, coffee makers are not.

We all like entertainment but our tastes all differ. You mentioned three games... AC, SoM and FarCry, all games I regularly enjoy. You seem to be saying these games are too similar and copy from too much from one another. You can throw the Witcher in there too as well as Faery Tale from 1987 and many others I am sure.

What these games try to do and its also what draws and endears me to these games is the Virtual World they try to portray. It seems obvious that they will have similar tropes because they are all playing to the same market.

For me AC Valhalla is a very entertaining game. It's one of the best adventure games I have played. My personal favorite is BotW. Are there things all these games can do better next time? Absolutely, always are.

Diversity?

We've never had greater diversity in gaming. I don't see that trend changing anytime soon. The thing that's going to kill that diversity in gaming will be the same thing that kills diversity in almost every other aspect of our first world lives.

[Deleted User] · November 2020

The user and all related content has been deleted.

Howdy, Stranger!

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Review - The RPG Files | MMORPG.com

Comments

거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다

거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Assassin's Creed Valhalla Review - The RPG Files | MMORPG.com

Comments

거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다

거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다