Look, all this discourse is like whatever. My only agenda here is knocking over Christian Churches for their gold like medieval Al Capone.



Your settlement is then expanded and built up entirely with goods derived from raiding – specifically raiding churches and monasteries (you literally do not seem to be able to resource raid other types of settlements, stick a pin in that, we're coming back to it too).



Both the ancient order plot and the whitewashed colonialism elicit mixed feelings from me.

I mean, from a social justice perspective I personally don't really care? Because it's not like this is colonialism against an actual modern oppressed group having whitewashed colonialism done against them, it's white European Christians, they're fine.

Them being the targets of video game violence just does not ping my fucked-up radar the same way blowing away brown people in COD does. It's the same reason I'm fine with Amon Amarth songs about burning down Christian villages. It's nowhere near, like, actual Nazi metal.

Also, I'm not a fan of throwing around the word colonialism in these cases as if you can just neatly draw a line between the European colonialism of the last few centuries, and the repeating cycle of migratory invasion, subjugation and assimilation that's been a dominant fixture of European history. It's the kind of erasure of specificity and context that allows Irish-American shitheads to go "The Irish were slaves too!" to get one over on black people.

Especially considering it's both what put the Saxons there in the first place and the descendants of those Norse settles were victims of wholesale mass murder at the hands of William the Conqueror in the next cycle. And especially considering how the English can be fucking shameless about whitewashing their own colonialism.

I really wish I had a gif of that old Mike Tyson's Punch-Out parody of Mario going "I'll allow it", because that's how I feel here.
 
I'm extremely happy to take Ubisoft to task for things like, say, softballing police complicity in the British surveillance state or whitewashing the British government's involvement in anti-refugee policy in Watch Dogs Legion, or its flag waving for US military adventurism in Ghost Recon Wildlands, or this enormous list of positively baffling shit from the various modern Far Cry games, because those games engage with modern situations and promote certain values in respect of real lives and real marginalised people, today. But this is somewhat like going after Assassin's Creed Black Flag because it romantacises being a pirate. Like after we're done here are we going to knock down the gates of the Crusader Kings thread and lecture everyone there about their complicity in the promotion of monarchic dictatorship?
 
I'm more baffled by the inability of the player to kill villagers and priests in a Viking simulator. Like I get that they're trying to present you as a heroic figure, but I'd think there'd be at least a little appeal in letting you go full GTA on Dark Ages England as a Viking. Just get bored with the story and game so you just row up to some village and kill everyone you see.
 
Do you at least get to do that viking thing that is seducing away the wifes of the english by bathing, dressing up with nice clothes, jewelry and braided hair?
 
I'm extremely happy to take Ubisoft to task for things like, say, softballing police complicity in the British surveillance state or whitewashing the British government's involvement in anti-refugee policy in Watch Dogs Legion, or its flag waving for US military adventurism in Ghost Recon Wildlands, or this enormous list of positively baffling shit from the various modern Far Cry games, because those games engage with modern situations and promote certain values in respect of real lives and real marginalised people, today. But this is somewhat like going after Assassin's Creed Black Flag because it romantacises being a pirate. Like after we're done here are we going to knock down the gates of the Crusader Kings thread and lecture everyone there about their complicity in the promotion of monarchic dictatorship?

everything has context.

The ancient order secret cult thing hits different in the era of Qanon than it did 12 years ago when the first game dropped. I'm not entirely sure how Ubisoft can shift away from it, but like, it's starting to make me uncomfortable, so I'd want to see them give it a shot. Especially considering how Ubi's other games also fall into bizarre right wing fantasylands and the whole, uh, huge issue with racism from management.

The norse colonialism stuff is essentially an echo of what Dr. Deceraux noted on his blog, although I don't feel as strongly here as I do about the conspiracy stuff. I'd honestly be happier if it was just colonialism and not colonialism against the ancient world order in a way that echoes modern conspiracies.

If we go that far, then it is best to just stop buying/playing video games and use the money for food and toilet paper for when the next Corona spike hits.

I've only got to fuck other vikings so far in the game.
 
Anyone else feel like Valhalla's level balance is weird? I've fought bosses hundreds of levels above me and won within a dozen attempts. I mean, I'm good at learning patterns and all that because i've played Fromsoft games since I was a kid, so figuring out how to beat bosses isn't hard. But the actual power of the enemies seems to cap out at nearly enough damage to kill me in one hit. I'm playing on the second hardest difficulty and often it only takes a good six to fourteen Hel's Rage (or whatever the tackle move is) and it's over.

The only boss I've ever needed to actually retreat from was the Black Shuck, since that move didn't work on it and I kept losing my entire health bar from the grapple move it had. But I was still over a hundred levels lower then that thing and I brought it down to half several times.
 
I am now nearly done with game and I have to say I find it quite lacklustre compared to Oddysey, even if I do not share some of the fundamental misgivings others have about the game (I certainly don't share the opinion that the game portrays the norse or even you as the good guys...). Partially it is simply that Viking age England is not as interesting to travel through and explore as for example ancient Greece or some of the settings of the earlier games but I feel like what really drags down the game in the later half is its lacklustre story design (and don't get me started on what happens in modernity), especially the whole "territory arc design". They are decent time-wasters and can be quite fun though some of them really stretched my suspension of disbelief pretty hard but they are at best loosely connected to the main storylines and their design lead to a massive,useless and unused expansion of the cast at the cost of the central characters and the Raven clan itself which really starts to hurt the game at the later stages when a lot of the emotional beats hinge on said characters being important to you which is hard if they are not present for most of the game.

And the same can be said be said of the "antagonists" of the game, the Order of the Ancient is filled with forgettable characters and it really tells you something that you kill the majority of its "leaders" not by doing interesting quests or even infiltrating a stronghold of some kind but by chasing after a few clues and then killing a random nobody posing as a stablehand in some village - congratulations you killed one of the five or so leaders of a century old conspiracy. There are glimpses of something more in some of the city arcs and with a single order member but overall this was the most soulless and unimaginative "templar order" I have encountered so far and it really seems they only included it because they think an AC game needs a conspiracy of some kind. And it is not like the people outside the order are much better either, even Alfred is little more than a sidenote and that is just sad.

And considering the game hammers home the importance of the clan every time it can what it actually does with said clan (and its connected raiding mechanic) is pretty disappointing, nearly all your interactions with the clan members are based on them being merchants of largely cosmetic items with maybe two or three small quests connected to some of them and the majority of your buildings do nothing but other some insignificant and boring percentage bonus to a timed buff with the village leaving little to no impression on me.

Eivor is an okay main-character but she is no Kassandra or Enzio and I really miss the mysthical/open minded attitude of their predecessors instead of the what at times seems utter antipathy Eivor seems to have in regards to anything not fighting related.


It really feels to me like the developers either ran out of time or passion with this game with the start clearly having some of the best moments (though admittedly it is also where the "good vikings, bad saxons" idea is most problematic) while a lot of the later parts feel disconnected and/or soulless to me which is sad. On a more personal note I also really dislike the blue colour scheme the game employs in regards to "your" soldiers and at last a quick tip for making some of the "puzzles" quicker to go through, the exploding trap arrow ability allows you to destroy destructible walls etc without having to look for and lug around those explosive amphoras.
 
I am probably about halfway through the game and.... I agree.

Every time the main story came up I kind of wanted it to go away again. I felt way more interested in the kingdom quests that had nothing to do with heir to the gods nonsense.
 
They finally relented and did a Japan game, but a little too late when it comes out after Ghost of Tsushima already did the premise and looked cool doing it, lol.

And Rise of the Ronin, and Sekiro, and Nioh, and Like a Dragon: Ishin.

Like, not all those are quite the same thing. But that just goes to show that if Ubisoft wanted to pop off with a Samurai game they should have done so years ago, not now when not only has a better version of Samurai's Creed already come out, but also genre hybrids.
 
And Rise of the Ronin, and Sekiro, and Nioh, and Like a Dragon: Ishin.

Like, not all those are quite the same thing. But that just goes to show that if Ubisoft wanted to pop off with a Samurai game they should have done so years ago, not now when not only has a better version of Samurai's Creed already come out, but also genre hybrids.

I admit it's a little odd that the criticism is on how Assassin's Creed hasn't done "a samurai game", when I expected the criticism to be that Assassin's Creed hasn't done a ninja game.

The main point is still valid (Sekiro is absolutely a ninja game, for instance), but the "samurai" part seems a little out of place.

I can even foresee myself doing the same thing I did in Assassin's Creed Syndicate and playing mostly just the female character, because for some reason both there and (reportedly) here the female character is the one who gets the stealth-focused skills.

Having said that, I'll also probably be waiting several more years, until Ubisoft stops trying to link their games with whatever side apps or websites for in-game benefits. Might as well wait for a "complete edition" that gives everything inherently, when those side apps inevitably reach End Of Service.
 
As I mentioned in the unpopular opinions thread it was always impossible to not be 'late' to the concept of doing a samurai game. The major reason why they avoided doing one is that it was such a popular topic.

Anyway it's potentially a really interesting dynamic having one playable character be one of Oda Nobunaga's favourites and the other a shinobi from Iga province. The cinematic trailer kind of glosses over how they end up working together but there's a lot of drama you can mine from it early on. Hard to guess what direction it'll go in terms of Nobunaga, Akechi Mitsuhide, etc. All we really have to go off there is Naoe's personal view on the personal cost. I guess I'd be a little surprised if they did a Demon Lord Nobunaga interpretation, but who knows.
 
As I mentioned in the unpopular opinions thread it was always impossible to not be 'late' to the concept of doing a samurai game. The major reason why they avoided doing one is that it was such a popular topic.

Anyway it's potentially a really interesting dynamic having one playable character be one of Oda Nobunaga's favourites and the other a shinobi from Iga province. The cinematic trailer kind of glosses over how they end up working together but there's a lot of drama you can mine from it early on. Hard to guess what direction it'll go in terms of Nobunaga, Akechi Mitsuhide, etc. All we really have to go off there is Naoe's personal view on the personal cost. I guess I'd be a little surprised if they did a Demon Lord Nobunaga interpretation, but who knows.
I mentioned in the other thread, there is some stuff already written on Oda for the AC canon but it's pretty short. Basically open to the assassins but then got a hold of the sword of eden and then at some point after that honnoji happens (could use that as why the demon king persona came about but I kind of like him as someone who is just perfectly fine with the amount of bodies he needs to stack and few concerns about making them for the grander goal). It is written that the assassin order were the ones to kill him (Hanzo is also mentioned as a member of the order but not the killer) and while I think this could definitely be rewritten given this was only in a mobile card game that lived just past a year, it could make for interesting strife between the main characters. I'm not sure if this is taking place pre or post honnoji (they would have some more freedom after given Yasuke disappears completely from the record after being handed back to the Jesuits).
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if this is taking place pre or post honnoji (they would have some more freedom after given Yasuke disappears completely from the record after being handed back to the Jesuits).

As I mentioned in the Fiction Opinions thread, Yasuke went into Oda Nobunaga's service literally a year before Nobunaga's death, so Honnou-ji would very likely be the middle of the plotline at latest. My own speculation is it's going to be entirely backstory, and all the Nobunaga appearances in the game will be Yasuke's flashbacks.

(Coming up with an OC African retainer to Toyotomi Hideyoshi would make things much more interesting, even if it's still constrained by being set in Sengoku anyway.)

I'm also not very sure how meaningful "actually Assassins killed Oda Nobunaga" would be. Honnou-ji was being surrounded and sieged by Mitsuhide's army, basically defenseless, so assassinating him then and there would be rather pointless. The only added context Assassin involvement would have is either (less likely) causing Nobunaga's head to disappear, which Nobunaga himself wanted anyway (and happened in RL), or (more likely) something about Pieces Of Eden and taking one away from Nobunaga at that moment. Why they waited until that moment, who even knows.
 
As I mentioned in the Fiction Opinions thread, Yasuke went into Oda Nobunaga's service literally a year before Nobunaga's death, so Honnou-ji would very likely be the middle of the plotline at latest. My own speculation is it's going to be entirely backstory, and all the Nobunaga appearances in the game will be Yasuke's flashbacks.

(Coming up with an OC African retainer to Toyotomi Hideyoshi would make things much more interesting, even if it's still constrained by being set in Sengoku anyway.)

I'm also not very sure how meaningful "actually Assassins killed Oda Nobunaga" would be. Honnou-ji was being surrounded and sieged by Mitsuhide's army, basically defenseless, so assassinating him then and there would be rather pointless. The only added context Assassin involvement would have is either (less likely) causing Nobunaga's head to disappear, which Nobunaga himself wanted anyway (and happened in RL), or (more likely) something about Pieces Of Eden and taking one away from Nobunaga at that moment. Why they waited until that moment, who even knows.
Could be they orchestrated the whole thing, there's enough thoeries about why it happened they can pick several to thread together if they want. Ac has always been super vague about what the pieces of eden do, but I believe the sword is supposed to amp you up both personally and as a military strategist so could have it be the only point the opening was there? He was going on a sightseeing tour at the time while the others were handling the other clans so maybe the guard lowered enough. Since they're using Yasuke, I imagine they'll go with the highly loyal aspect that other media with him has used recently (nioh and SW5 take this approach) so it could be a crisis point if he discovers it later. That said don't know much detail on the full plot at the time, so wait and see. What they wrote in the card game might just be discarded wholesale and then who knows.
 
I admit it's a little odd that the criticism is on how Assassin's Creed hasn't done "a samurai game", when I expected the criticism to be that Assassin's Creed hasn't done a ninja game.

Assassin's Creed has always had plenty of instances of straight up face to face combat, and samurai historically have often been the guys to do double duty as ninja. So it makes perfect sense to me that the game will also do double duty as a samurai/ninja game.

Also Assassin's Creed has always had a plainclothes blend in with the crowd mechanic to it's stealth. That works for a samurai, not so much for someone obviously dressed like a ninja. It would be cool if the ninja girl could go plainclothes like an actual ninja, maybe even with Hitman style disguise mechanics, but I'm not anticipating that.

As I mentioned in the unpopular opinions thread it was always impossible to not be 'late' to the concept of doing a samurai game. The major reason why they avoided doing one is that it was such a popular topic.

Sure, that would be all well and good if AssCreed wasn't kinda B or even C tier in terms of AAA game combat. If they did this earlier it might have gotten more goodwill based off of "haha katana go schwing". But after high profile banger after banger in the field I feel it might get a lukewarm reception unless they come out swinging harder than as usual for an Ubisoft game.

As I mentioned in the Fiction Opinions thread, Yasuke went into Oda Nobunaga's service literally a year before Nobunaga's death

> Infamous unifier warlord hires first black samurai.
> Infamous unifier warlord dies immediately after.

That to me automatically makes Yasuke a shit-hot game character and makes me want to see what shit he's going to get stuck in and how many whatever-the-japanese-equivalent-of-monocles get popped in the process. Not that I think that Ubisoft, or think they should, try to do black on feudal japanese racial politics because that would be stupid. But to me it's an entertaining thought.
 
Last edited:
Assassin's Creed has always had plenty of instances of straight up face to face combat, and samurai historically have often been the guys to do double duty as ninja. So it makes perfect sense to me that the game will also do double duty as a samurai/ninja game.

Also Assassin's Creed has always had a plainclothes blend in with the crowd mechanic to it's stealth. That works for a samurai, not so much for someone obviously dressed like a ninja. It would be cool if the ninja girl could go plainclothes like an actual ninja, maybe even with Hitman style disguise mechanics, but I'm not anticipating that.



Sure, that would be all well and good if AssCreed wasn't kinda B or even C tier in terms of AAA game combat. If they did this earlier it might have gotten more goodwill based off of "haha katana go schwing". But after high profile banger after banger in the field I feel it might get a lukewarm reception unless they come out swinging harder than as usual for an Ubisoft game.



> Infamous unifier warlord hires first black samurai.
> Infamous unifier warlord dies immediately after.

That to me automatically makes Yasuke a shit-hot game character and makes me want to see what shit he's going to get stuck in and how many whatever-the-japanese-equivalent-of-monocles get popped in the process. Not that I think that Ubisoft, or think they should, try to do black on feudal japanese racial politics because that would be stupid. But to me it's an entertaining thought.

As said, there's very limited information so they could go whichever way they want honestly. I think in terms of known facts, physically described as very tall and very strong. In terms of events, was hired and made weapon bearer and then we know he fought in defense of Oda's son against Akechi's forces after Honnoji. He surrendered, Akechi made the world's most racist argument for why shouldn't be executed, and then handed back to the Jesuits and then the record ends. Ample room to play, just need to see what they do. I feel like the why of Akechi's betrayal will be something used since even with consesus coalescing now, still enough room for outside influences and it gives a good hook for Yasuke. I feel like he's going to be the outsider to the order with Naoe being at least familiar since Hattori Hanzo has been said to be a member. I wonder if they'll do a mission about escorting Tokugawa to safety in the aftermath of the coup as well. The Iga did do the heavy lifting on that one.
 
Last edited:
I feel like the why of Akechi's betrayal will be something used since even with consesus coalescing now, still enough room for outside influences and it gives a good hook for Yasuke.

I feel like Mitsuhide is probably the natural antagonist for this game but because his real life motivations for betraying Nobunaga are still just about ambiguous enough you can take him in many different directions. AssMemories generally aligned the Assassins with Tokugawa (an interesting but kind of cynical writing decision probably based on Ieyasu 'winning' in the end lol) but it seems kind of unlikely that they'll bring back, say, Taka or his storyline for this game. A mainline title release will basically forge its own path, though I could see a Sword of Eden being relevant to the plot.
 
Back
Top