• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Assassin's Creed Shadows

https://x.com/assassinscreed/status/1995175995670777942

1764776335331.png



 
Armenius said:
Because people make a big deal out of Steam player numbers in particular for some reason these days.
Click to expand...

I suppose that can make sense, but a good chunk of the copies are not on Steam and that also applies to consoles which are probably 70% of the sales.

By the time I get around to playing this, hopefully I will have a PC capable of maxing it out. :p
 
Flogger23m said:
I suppose that can make sense, but a good chunk of the copies are not on Steam and that also applies to consoles which are probably 70% of the sales.

By the time I get around to playing this, hopefully I will have a PC capable of maxing it out. :p
Click to expand...
Their excuse is that Steam is a "good indicator.". Which makes absolutely no sense especially if it's also on consoles
 
Yeah but did they make the mission design not a fucking slog
 
First Ass Creed that I didn't finish (apart from the one that was a conversion of some handheld game). So bad. Had an option to make it truly great and fucked it up massively.
 
I don't think even think it's bad per se. Combat is fun, world looks great...

It's just RIDICULOUSLY formulaic and Ubisoft-y, to an incredible fault. You will waste literal hours on bullshit that doesn't matter in the slightest just to get to the (good) parts that do.

Like it just doesn't feel like it respects your time.

The main story is fucking drowning in mandatory fetch quests that you need to do multiple of every time you want to move it forward.
 
socK said:
It's just RIDICULOUSLY formulaic and Ubisoft-y, to an incredible fault. You will waste literal hours on bullshit that doesn't matter in the slightest just to get to the (good) parts that do.

The main story is fucking drowning in mandatory fetch quests that you need to do multiple of every time you want to move it forward.
Click to expand...

Modern single player gaming in a nutshell.
 
Domingo said:
Pretty much. Ubisoft does it the most, but they aren't even the worst offenders anymore. Even good games (like the Spider-Man games) go absolutely ham with fetch quests. Beyond sales, gaming companies seem obsessed with "hours played" as a success metric.
Click to expand...

I've been playing some older, and shorter, games that are quite middle of the road. Despite this I often have more fun than other, objectively better games simply because the lame content ratio is much lower.
 
Domingo said:
Pretty much. Ubisoft does it the most, but they aren't even the worst offenders anymore. Even good games (like the Spider-Man games) go absolutely ham with fetch quests. Beyond sales, gaming companies seem obsessed with "hours played" as a success metric.
Click to expand...
The Tomb Raider reboot trilogy is the perfect example. The first game was mostly just adventure and gameplay going from point A to point B with a reason to do so. It didn't make you take five different detours between point A and B. The second game added in detours between point A and B. It wasn't nearly as fun because of it but the playtime was increased dramatically. The third game had more detours between points than it had points and ended up with the most bloated playtime of all and wasn't fun.

Pointless time wasters pad the time needed to complete the game but do not add fun. They're also really easy to add and rarely take much thought or effort because they're almost always the exact same thing and have been done multiple times before in many different games. Companies don't want to spend the creative energy in developing story and we end up with games which are many times more filler than actual gaming. Not only does this system result in bad games it also rewards the lazy and incompetent while driving out the creatives in the industry. It's much easier to churn out low effort slop but in the long run it will drive off the very consumers who buy the product and we're at that point now.
 
in most games fetch quests are totally optional...it's just a way for developers to pad their main story while giving players more things to do other then the main story and side quests
 
polonyc2 said:
in most games fetch quests are totally optional...it's just a way for developers to pad their main story while giving players more things to do other then the main story and side quests
Click to expand...

In the case of AC: Shadows, the fetch quests are part of the main story in order to get your contact to give you information about your target.

I'm not really complaining about Shadows though. I liked it. I liked it better than Valhalla, but not necessarily as much as Odyssey or Origins.
 
It's becoming more of a trend for fetch quests to be unofficially necessary. You don't have to do them, but you aren't going to powered up enough to progress beyond a certain point if you don't. I think they realized that achievement/trophy hunters are a dying breed, so that isn't the carrot it once was.
 
Domingo said:
It's becoming more of a trend for fetch quests to be unofficially necessary. You don't have to do them, but you aren't going to powered up enough to progress beyond a certain point if you don't. I think they realized that achievement/trophy hunters are a dying breed, so that isn't the carrot it once was.
Click to expand...

Agreed 100%. In most games you can skip side quests, and loose out on good items, be under leveled, or just not get the gameplay diversity (weapons or ability unlocks).
 
I bought this for 1/2 off during the last holiday sale and am finally giving it a go. The graphics are great. Combat is at least somewhat challenging just because you die quickly. The rest just isn't doing it for me. It's tediously slow and the characters have zero personality. The world feels oddly flat. Even when it isn't. I can't tell if it's the camera angles or what, but it just comes across as flat.
Without reading 37 pages worth of comments, I think what's wrong with this game is exactly what I figured it would be. It's 10 years too late. The theme has been done to death and it has been done better. The Assassin's Creed games have gone to the well too many times with the gameplay structure. Games like Tsushima and Nioh have handled the setting better. It's an average game that's inferior to its own prequels as well as the games that were inspired by them.
 
Yeah I thought the story was a little flat. Really came down to assassinate x amount of people and then somebody gives you the clue to assassinate the main guy in the region. Once you get the protector armor it's almost impossible to die because you can block even the unblockable attacks so you just run around through the castles killing everybody as quickly as possible.

Of the newer RPG style games I think I liked Odyssey the best followed by origins then shadows. I really didn't care for Valhalla.
 
kirbyrj said:
Yeah I thought the story was a little flat. Really came down to assassinate x amount of people and then somebody gives you the clue to assassinate the main guy in the region. Once you get the protector armor it's almost impossible to die because you can block even the unblockable attacks so you just run around through the castles killing everybody as quickly as possible.

Of the newer RPG style games I think I liked Odyssey the best followed by origins then shadows. I really didn't care for Valhalla.
Click to expand...

Odyssey is definitely my favorite, didn't mind Valhalla though and liked it better than Mirage. Figured I give Shadows a go since Walmart had the Xbox disc version on sale for $20, just need to wait for the DLC to go back on sale. I've only made it through the prologue but so far playing as two different characters is annoying. And I'm sure they're going to force me to switch off at different points in the game based on the opening.
 
Odyssey is my favorite. Maybe even from the whole series, although Black Flag was also great. Valhalla was a slight letdown, but also quite good. It mostly suffered from trying to be too long. Mirage was "meh" but compelling enough to keep me going.
With Shadows, I'm not sure I'm going to bother. I don't hate it, but there just isn't much that makes me want to keep going. The characters are boring, I don't care about building my villa, and there's a certain jankiness to the controls/movement that wasn't present in the other games. Almost like they outsourced that one aspect of the game to Eastern Europe. I dunno. Maybe it'll get better. Forza is still a month away so I've definitely got time to kill if the game gets better.
 
Shadows...yikes. At this point I'm a couple weeks in and I want to complete this game, but damn is it tedious. Half of Japan is involved in some sort of nefarious cabal and once you get to a certain point then one cabal mission suddenly splinters into 8-9 more. Want to just stick to the story missions and ignore the side stuff? You can't. They gate everything by level so you have to do the side stuff to gain levels. Everything is far away and getting there is boring and identical. It would be one thing if it were fun, but it's the same mission over and over again. It's just so much bullshit. The characters are about as compelling as a bowl of plain oatmeal, too. If you look at a checklist of things Shadows does/has, it sounds awesome. The catch is that there's no heart and soul to any of it. It's like when a band puts out an album to fulfil a contract...and it's a triple live album.
AC: Hexe better give the series the same kick in the ass that Origins did. If it's another game in this same lineage, I'm out.
 
There is an admirable amount of content in this game, but it's all the same. They're doubling down on something the game has in spades and avoiding something it lacks - compelling variety.
 
I have to be a little bit appreciative that Ubisoft for all their problems, continues to support AC titles for the long haul with additional post launch content and updates. I am a bit nonplussed that apparently they completely removed the previous Attack on Titan content though - is that still the case? It seems annoying to me for a couple of reasons not least of all is that previous titles like Origins still has the Final Fantasy XV event/content, instead of it being removed at some point..and on another level both AC Shadows + Attack On Titan both disappointed me so much in other ways that it isn't fun to remember either of those!

Despite the post launch update to Shadows from a story standpoint, Its really annoying that they didn't come up with the second expansion as planned or that Claws of Awaji wasn't considered part of the mainline narrative. Most AC titles in the past had both "historical world" and "mythological world" expansions and after all the...issues...with Shadows I thought we'd at least get a Isu take on the Shinto / Buddhist mythos laden world..but no. There was discussion that the second expansion could have been a chance to "make up" for the issues of the mainline title by starting a new playable character, Yamanuchi Taka, but apparently that never came to fruition... what a loss.

I really should get around to finishing Shadows just for the sake of it when I get back into another open world game, but I just can't get over how badly the ball was dropped in many ways, despite the mechanics and world buiilding being reasonably decent. Japan has been done wrong in recent years - Ghost of Yotei getting only a fraction of the interest that Ghost of Tsushima offered for instane and all of the usual suspects claiming that the game was actually perfect and instead people were just...close minded ..is tiring; as tiring as the other side of the culture war spending time just harping on clickbait using the same handful of memes. Its really too bad.
 
Domingo said:
There is an admirable amount of content in this game, but it's all the same. They're doubling down on something the game has in spades and avoiding something it lacks - compelling variety.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s a shame because it’s graphically impressive and has the bones to be something good, but it just isn’t good.
 
RanceJustice said:
I have to be a little bit appreciative that Ubisoft for all their problems, continues to support AC titles for the long haul with additional post launch content and updates.
Click to expand...
It's business. Ubisoft has no choice. Assassin's Creed is their biggest IP in terms of revenue. It also bet the farm on it buy essentially ignoring many of its IP's in favor of turning out more AC titles. Ubisoft eventually makes good on their games in the sense that they tend to fix most of the biggest bugs and problems, even addressing some customer feedback in the games when possible. However, they don't really deserve credit for this as the work they put into the game after the fact only gets the games into the state they should have been in at launch. Day one Ubisoft titles tend to be buggy pieces of shit. Some of them are unplayable for some people for weeks or even months after release because they are such a shit show.

The countless YouTube videos showcasing bugs in AC Shadows, including awful AI voice work for NPCs etc. shows Ubisoft has done nothing but get worse over the last few years. Their problems are all of their own making.
 
Dan_D said:
Day one Ubisoft titles tend to be buggy pieces of shit. Some of them are unplayable for some people for weeks or even months after release because they are such a shit show
Click to expand...

stop it...stop exaggerating...the only AC game that was in really bad shape at launch in terms of making ii close to unplayable was Unity...other than that it's the usual bugs and performance issues that literally every single AAA game has at launch
 
polonyc2 said:
stop it...stop exaggerating...the only AC game that was in really bad shape at launch in terms of making ii close to unplayable was Unity...other than that it's the usual bugs and performance issues that literally every single AAA game has at launch
Click to expand...
I'm not.

I didn't say that it was unplayable for the majority of people did I? I said it's unplayable for "some people". If you actually read any of the early patch notes for some of those games you'd know I'm technically correct. Which is the best kind of correct. For example, it was weeks if not months before they unfucked Ghost Recon Wildlands to a point where it was playable for me. It didn't work with SLI out of the gate which was needed for it to run well at higher resolutions and multi-monitor setups like mine. Also, the comment is bullshit in that Ubisoft games are WORSE for bugs and issues than most other AAA studios. The only one I think can be counted as being consistently worse is Bethesda.

Yes, a lot of AAA games launch in a bad state. Even so, few compare to the absolute state of a new Ubisoft game.
 
Far Cry is their other big IP. I actually like those, but even that is getting stale. The checkpoint design is getting increasingly lazy. Siege is big for competitive gaming. The other big titles like Watch Dogs, the recent Ghost Recons, and The Division seem to be put on the back burner currently.
 
RanceJustice said:
I am a bit nonplussed that apparently they completely removed the previous Attack on Titan content though - is that still the case? It seems annoying to me for a couple of reasons not least of all is that previous titles like Origins still has the Final Fantasy XV event/content, instead of it being removed at some point..and on another level both AC Shadows + Attack On Titan both disappointed me so much in other ways that it isn't fun to remember either of those!
Click to expand...

Some of the stuff is just allowed for a time based on the initial contracts I imagine - same reason they removed the Predator and that mission from Ghost Recon Wildlands. Played the mission with a friend from free trials when it was live but never beat it - went to go buy the game to finally beat it - found out it was removed - no sale for you🤷‍♂️
 
kram182 said:
Some of the stuff is just allowed for a time based on the initial contracts I imagine - same reason they removed the Predator and that mission from Ghost Recon Wildlands. Played the mission with a friend from free trials when it was live but never beat it - went to go buy the game to finally beat it - found out it was removed - no sale for you🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
They did the same thing with both Ghost Recon Wildlands and Breakpoint. They removed the Predator mission from Wildlands and the Terminator missions from Breakpoint. As silly as both missions are, I enjoyed them and thought they were a lot of fun. I thought they even fit thematically with their respective games.
 
I found AC Shadows to be a fairly polished affair. I can't recall any glitches, bugs, problems, etc. from a technical standpoint. That's mostly been the case after the dumpster fire that was the launch day version of Unity. With Shadows, there was basically 1 mission type and it involved killing everyone in a particular area. You either went in like John Wick or you skulked around and got some stealth kills before going full Wick. The end result was the same and going the stealth route accomplished little more than taking more time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top