Like the title says, I'm a new player to the assassin's Creed series, with Odyssey being my first game played (well, not exactly. I had the ds game with ezio, but that's a different matter) and I'm really loving it.
Alexios' journey across Greece and the twists and turns he goes through has kept me hooked with little to no problems with the game so far, except for the present day sections being poorly written and spoken. The gameplay is fun and the rpg mechanics in tandem with the mercenaries is pretty great as well.
When looking up how others felt about the game, i was surprised with how negative many were about the game. Am I missing something? From what I heard, origins, a very similar game, is being praised while Odyssey much less so. Is it because the two games are too similar?
Tl;dr: why do people not like Odyssey? It's been pretty fun so far.
I personally really love Odyssey, even more than Origins, which is really great, too. I love the fact that we have some choices and I think the story is great. I also really like Kass (or Alexios) as the protagonist. It's definitively one of my favorite AC game, but as you said, the modern days are not really interesting.
As for why people do not like it, I think it's because it's too different than the previous AC games, or than their favorite ones. I personally don't mind the changes and I enjoy them even if I've played all the previous AC games, but it's not the case for everyone. That's what I read the most often.
Well, for one thing, the ending of the first DLC, Legacy of the First Blade, rubbed some people the wrong way. I won't say why because I'm pretty sure you haven't played it, at least not yet.Originally Posted by miguelpikons Go to original post
Welcome in the forum!
They reason why many players don't like Odyssey is because its so different in comparison with the other titles and it also fails with new things it has introduced. Many fans who are in the series since day one or come into the series with previous installments hate the changes they made with Odyssey and that it barley feels like an Assassin Creed.
They story has until the end (and without the dlc) very few to do with Assassins Creed. They try to tell something more about the ISU but failed in that and created more questions then answers. Also they changed and destroyed a lot of the Lore. It often seems that the Writers of Odyssey doesnt know anything about the Story of the Assassins Creed Universe.
One of the Important Pillars of the series like Stealth or Parkour where also totally neglected by odyssey and lack in comparison with other titles. Its also the first AC that really forces you to grind because the Level caps are absurd.
Origins is liked by many people because it doesnt drive to much in the RPG Genre and has a god balance between the old formula and new RPG things. Origins story also tells much more about the Assassins and the Creed.
For me Odyssey is a mediocre game I dont hate it that much but for many people its the worst Assassins Creed because it doesnt want to be one. I think the should have give it a other name or make it a spin off.
At least Odyssey is not a bad game but a bad Assassins Creed.
Yes, Odyssey is a great game and probably has the best gameplay loop of the series (expected after 10 years of feedback and refinement). In a lot of ways, it puts other triple A games to shame with its excellent quality of life and controls and rewarding gameplay however the reason why many fans dislike it is rather simple: It's not an Assassin's Creed game. While it retains many of the same mechanics, the lore and story takes a lot of liberties and when you're playing as a character who is neither an Assassin nor cares about the creed (which doesn't exist yet) it's borderline false advertising. People like Origins by comparison because it's about the origin of the brotherhood (even though it's so not) but its premise is enough to trick people into thinking it's an Assassin's Creed game. Odyssey puts up no such pretense and quite blatantly says 'F you' to the traditions of the series. Like JKAC says, it's not a bad game. IMO it's a great game. It's just not a great Assassin's Creed game.
Well, critic doesn't necessarily mean we don't love the game. Would we even care that much, if we wouldn't?
That there was a lot discussion about the insane scaling in this game and as well about those sections, where you have to grind a lot before you can proceed in the story, is honest critic and a hint to developers, which parts of the game might just lead to putting it away (for a while) and play something less grindy and with a less insane scaling, where the feeling of progression can actually be felt. Then gear, which gets somewhat obsolete in the moment where i have finally upgraded it, because i level up and so on. This is critic, not hate.
I have quite a few things, i don't like in Odyssey, but that doesn't mean, i don't love it.
This is BS narrative coming mostly from ppl who dont know anything about AC.Originally Posted by AnimusLover Go to original post
ACD dives into AC Isu lore more than any other AC game before it.
It retains AC-style gameplay and greatly improves both stealth and open conflict options compared to any other AC. Boss fights dont count bc they were forced open conflicts since AC1 and AC2 days.
The central plot is a typical AC story. Templars vs Assassins is ideology conflict that started way before those sides got their modern names. This isnt something ACD suddenly invented. Even AC2 branded Cain as 1st Templar. And similar ideas were in other games. For example AC4 Assassins are natives that just happened to have the same ideology, they didnt descend from European and Middle East Assassins.
Ppl often confuse Creed with tenets. The fact that ACD lets you kill civilians has nothing to do with Creed. Creed is the view and understanding of the world, and its exact wording doesnt even matter so long as the idea behind it is similar.