Assassins Creed Valhalla - set in the Viking age

Dropping truth bombs on Valhalla.

Btw I totally didn't figured out the refugees party line Ubi will probably go for. But yeah, this guy is likely right - Vikings are just peaceful refugees that have as much right to live in England as the Saxons. And Alfred is basically Drumpf, barring them from coming.

 

Can't trust a video where its viewers believe ass creed 1 was fantastic

 

This autistic Kremlinology video is not even partially amusing nor interesting. All of these fags would have said the same shit about Odyssey, and it turned out to be pretty good. Not groundbreaking, not terrible, just pretty good.

AC:Valhalla is made by a muslim who looks like a terrorist, tbh. And he may well be a terrorist of computer games, spreading fear and chaos through bad writing and forced SJWisms.

But some dumbass making a youtube video on the safest bet possible, i.e. that AC:V will be cringeworthy, full of SJW moments, anachronisms, developer fantasies and focus group derived decisions, that's a given. How you choose to interpret that, is on you. So conclusions that the Vikings are stand-ins for middle-eastern rapefugees and the king is a stand-in for Trump, then you've put more thought into the plot than the Ubiwriters.

If you think Ubiwriters can make a coherent plot just to explain their bizarre view of the world, well that would be a fucking first.

edit: comment from the Video link, worth sharing..

"Inspired vaguely by historical events and characters and revised for the progressive ideology, this work of truth (no really trust us) was designed, developed, and produced by a multicultural team of various beliefs, sexual orientations and gender identities, except Christians, heterosexuals, and normal fucking people"

 

So I spent an hour going through some rogue ubisoft employee leaking stuff.
And then.


Props to the guy, he played us like a damn fiddle!

 

Well, he did make black flag, which was the best game in the series.

 

That's some rose colored nostalgia glasses you're using there, AC4 is mediocre garbage. It's great if you're 10 yo and want indulge your pirate power fantasy.

Console trash, tbh.

Plot: stupid
Historicity: laughable
Gameplay: banal
Graphics: pedestrian

Even so, this sandnigger didn't make that game, he was on the team and has been on the AC Montreal team for the longest time. Now he's leading the project, a different role.

AC games aren't an auteur project, it's one of the core pillars of Ubi and this guy will tow the line. No controversies, everything will be safe for mainstream opinion and gameplay has to impress the generic consumer who thought AC4 was the best game in the franchise, because that's the accepted opinion. You'll love it Kem0sabe

 

Fun: 10/10
AC Rogue was also good.

 

Well, far be it from me to deny people from having fun. Playing pirate and indulging in a power fantasy sounds like fun!

I thought Odyssey was fun, but would never describe it as a great game. It's good, dumb, fun. Then people start debating DNA memories and how incredibly historical the game is because Ubi had consultants, and all that jazz for some reason. If people are just having fun with it, then no further justification is needed.

For the record, I didn't have any particular fun playing AC4, I couldn't get over how stupid the meta-plot was and it pissed me off every time I was yanked out of the otherwise ok fun pirate adventure to masturbate over some Abstergo bullshit.

 

I enjoyed the world of origins much more than Odyssey, they overreached with the expansiveness of the later and the world felt too much like copy pasted design.

 

For me it's good because it's probably the best pirate game, the ship battles, the shanties, the world, the towns, hunting, raiding, the wildlife etc. It's not an "AC" game and that's what, ironically, makes it better.

 

Plus giant boars, Medusas, Minotaurs and half the Spartan army being women turned the world into a goofy theme park. Immersion = zero.

 

I'm not surprised, Origins was considerably more bland, safe and normie-friendly than Odyssey. It didn't have any RPG elements, it was still trying to make older AC players feel at home. I have no idea what you mean by copy pasted design, that's not a word I'd use to describe the game world at all. The expansiveness was important to the epic feel of your journey, your Odyssey. An Odyssey takes years.

I can see that, it's a fun pirate game and we don't have enough of those! Actually now that you mention it, the best thing about Odyssey is that it wasn't an "AC" game either. It was an adventure game set in low-fantasy Greece. Damn good fun if you like Greek myths, the movie 300 and don't give a toss about AC.

Seriously, what kind of autistic shit is this you're posting? It's completely of contact with reality, clearly you're frothing at the mouth, because for whatever reason Odyssey triggers you.

Here's a spoiler: there's no immersion in *any* AC game, ever. They're all shit when it comes to accuracy, historicity, realism and credibility. All. Of. Them.

So your complaint is not credible at all, and comes off as a low effort rant, from a seriously butthurt autist, who is desperately trying to deflate the value of his opinion, fast.

 

Not that I'm hoping in a fruitful conversation here but just so I'm clear:

I say Odyssey has zero immersion. Your reply is that's autistic frothing-at-the-mouth shit because all AC games, including Odyssey, have zero immersion.

Is that about the size of it?

 

When they say immersion, it's feeling like you're in a Muslim country 1000 years ago even if you don't know what that's like

 

Nobody was claiming that Odyssey was an "immersive" game. So it's yet another un-immersive, historically unreliable fantasy game. No. Shit.

That's called making a verifiable observation, you utter autist.

AC games or immersion. Pick one.

I've noticed that the terms have very different meanings between people. Some describe what you did, as immersion. Some call it "historical authenticity" and so on and so forth.

Clearly the bar is simply not the same between people, and the more ignorant you are of actual history, this bar is lower. It's easier to fool someone who doesn't know better.

Goes without saying.

None of the AC games try very hard to fool anyone, so those who find themselves "immersed" or think these games are "historically authentic" aren't even passing the lowest of bars, and yet are loud and proud about it and demand their feelings spared and not to be ridiculed for this inexcusable ignorance.

Tough luck, I will name and shame anyone who thinks any AC game is "immersive", that's the least they deserve. Point and laugh.

---

Doesn't mean the game isn't fun. This is where the autists are separated from normal people.

I genuinely enjoyed playing Odyssey and at no point was I "immersed" or in awe of the "historical accuracy". In fact, that can be said about any AC game I've played.

Some people, especially those on the spectrum, often have a very hard time discerning between something that's fun and something has inherent quality. In other words, if they like a game (or any other product), it must be good and well made and must be somehow genuinely great apart from them subjectively enjoying it.

AC games are often fun, but because fun doesn't mean quality or good, autists experience strong cognitive dissonance.

They can't praise the gameplay (obviously), nor can they praise the story (lol), so more often than not, they fall back on their ignorance and claim in all honesty that the game is "immersive" or "historically authentic".

Instead of simply facing the reality of the situation that this game or series they like is trash, and because they can't discern between things they like and things that are objectively good, this becomes a bizarre personal issue.

One quote by a "fan" that stands out to me, he was complaining about the new series of AC games (Origins/Odyssey) by claiming that Assassin's Creed (the first game) started out as a "Historical Sim where you had complete contextual control over your character by having actions grouped to different areas of your body" and then had degenerated into an RPG... quoted part is verbatim.

Historical Sim. I don't even

 

That's...literally what I said.

So my post was true....but simultaneously autistic frothing at the mouth. Right.

Has it occurred to you that you might be losing it? It wouldn't be first time on the Codex.

 

What I meant by copy pasted design was the world itself, most of the islands, terrain, cities, felt the same all over.

Origins despite being set mainly in a desert environment, looked amazing, the arquitecture looks glorious, the oasis, the river, the wild life. Odyssey as a sequel is a huge downgrade in world design.

 

So your post had no context. Very autistic of you. Literal interpretations, no sensibility for context.

I called you autistic (which you are) and frothing at the mouth (which you were), and now you've learned something new - so the autistic mind thinks these are "weapons" to use.

They are not, they are observations of your behavior. I am rubber, you are glue, is not a rhetorical tool.

You don't even remember what you were writing only a few pages ago.

Not just a proof of your retardedness, but also explains why you're so butthurt over Odyssey and the newer games. You like the old AC games, the shit ones. They've actually become better with each iteration, but you like the utter trash ones. Nothing wrong with having bad taste, but it is worth pointing out.

So you sperged many times in this thread over how Odyssey isn't "immersive"

Indeed it is not. But it is arguably way more immersive and a better game all round than console trash like AC2. Let's look at AC2:

- where all of Florence speaks with American-trying-to-speak-faux-20th-century-Italian-accent.
- where women are all liberated and have boyfriends
- where mothers are perfectly happy that their sons fornicate
- where guards are stationed on rooftops and perches (I don't even)
- where treasure chests are found on random balconies
- where you are a born master parkour/pickpocket because reasons
- where you're constantly being bombarded with *woosh* *flash* cutscene noise when anything happens
- where there's huge shimmering forcefield around the area (because that's so immersive)
- where people literally disappear in a flash after you've talked to them, they just *poof* disappear
- where Da Vinci lives down the street and declares he wants to do anatomy or something, apropos of nothing
- and so on and so forth, it is so stupid and so gamey, that it beggars belief that you are sperging over lack of "immurshun"

Because there's no fucking immersion in any AC game, especially those you proclaim to like.

These games might as well have minotaurs. Something Odyssey didn't actually have, but you're such a sperg, you don't need to know. You just feel it, so it is true (spoiler, it is not true)

I agree, the towns and islands were pretty same-y for the most part, and I'm not defending that - but it is par for the course, isn't it?. Origins is the same. If there is a difference, please don't be shy and point them out. Odyssey is a huge game, with immensely varied scenery, and yet many things are copy pasted. The two are not mutually exclusive and as I mentioned, Origins is the same in this regard.

As for the older ones,

AC2 Florence has one color: brown. And all the buildings are very copy-pasted there. Even people's faces look copy-pasted there. I'd say AC Odyssey is quite an improvement, though there's definitely some copy-pasting going on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7q4oowfqnY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJpD-DllvnU

I'm sorry, I don't see it. Origins and Odyssey look very similar in production value. There's bunch of copy-pasted assets in Origins as well, just look at the videos. I think both look really good and more or less equal in graphics assets.

It's not really serious to claim it's a "huge downgrade", when it's clearly not a downgrade at all. Sidegrade perhaps, because it's the same engine and same graphics capabilities and very likely using much of the same staff to do the assets.

But whatever, let's say it is a downgrade in graphics (???) that doesn't really change that it's still a better game than Origins, because it's a better RPG and it's a less serious game. More fun, like Black Flag.

 

It's not a minotaur, it's a 3d illusion/mech made by the magic race of beings. I forget what they're called because it's so retarded. So, no - no actual minotaurs in the game. I played it, I know.

Way too many people feel the need to comment, but clearly haven't played the game, and don't care to play the game - but still have an opinion to share.

Sorry, but the "minotaur" is just a fancy projection, you even see that at the end of that video clip.

I was actually very pleased when that fight started and I thought Odyssey was going full Greek Mythology and dumping the Abstretardo plot, but no. It was very disappointing when I realized that *wasn't* the Minotaur. Just a trick.

 

You were duped by a dumbass on reddit and are proudly declaring it here. It's ok, we know you are a retard - but thanks for bringing slides to prove it.

Lemme guess, you think the Abstergo plot is p. cool.

 

lol dude. Please stop going through my history & shit rating my posts.

 

It's telling that you and your sperging kind, like the megasperg cvv masturbate over the most laughed at and derided "plot" in the history of video games. You are butthurt little fags, certainly, but worse you are genuine fans of Assassin's Creed. The original.

Kill yourselves.

 

He snapped. Time to wheel out the Silence of the Lambs pushcart, Prosperland is waiting.