kaleygh 3 posts
The game is a buggy mess. I have lost a lot of items, items that i have spent a lot of time to upgrade. All gone, together with the runes i slotted in. But now i have a lot of duplicates of the Hunters armor chest that i cannot delete, or remove in any way. Each time i log in, some random item in my inventory is being downgraded to a lower quality. It seems to be random, sometimes it is the Carolingian sword, sometimes the Soldiers Flail (i think that is what it is called).
The bird is useless.
Combat is very weird at times, especially when using a spear. It seems spears have trouble hitting enemies that are very close to my character sometimes.
Assassination animations are laughable. Some are very slow and weird, some are actually amusing.
Some of the finishers need to be deleted from the game. For example the one where you strangle the big guys, then yell at them, it just looks childish and should not be present in a game that claims to be AAA.
No one handed swords - what were you thinking ? You add flails that were not even used in that period, but not 1h swords ?
The lack of variety in sets and various weapons - Odyssey had an amazing loot system, why not use that instead ? You chose the lazy solution.
There are huge wild areas where no wildlife seems to be present. Not even a rabbit. Why?
The fish seem to often just vanish. There are plenty of rivers and sea shores where no fish can be found. Also, please fix the way fish behave, in a lot of places they seem to swim straight through rocks or under the shore. Looks very weird.
The general story is weak, the way Eivor gets the hidden blade, and many, MANY other such things ruin the story for me. When you get to the end and find the truth about the "gods" is kinda ruining the whole game for me. The way Christianity is represented in the game is laughable. Ubisoft seems to be ok with making a game where you burn churches and ridicule people for their faith as long as the target is some form of Christianity. If the game would have taken place in, say, the Middle East during the same period, i bet they would not have included burning mosques and ridiculing their faith.
Basim seems to be afraid that drinking any form of alcohol will "damn his eternal soul" (during the discussion with Eivor by the fire), but he seems to be just fine with torturing and killing people.
The way you take over kingdoms and other areas is a lot worse than in Odyssey. You do a usually simple, linear quest and voila, the whole area is on your side. The quests seem to imply that you have a say in how the story ends, but in the majority of cases, what you chose to do doesn't really matter much in the end.
The ship you use in the game is not something the Norse used, or anyone would use to cross an ocean. It is more like a glorified fishing boat with shields on the side.
I don`t know about you, but after playing this, I feel like i miss Kassandra and ancient Greece, or even the dunes of ancient Egypt.
TheCosmicBob 73 posts
On my PS4, some of the cutscenes either have dialog out of synch with the video, or just completely silent altogether. This shouldn't be that challenging a thing to get right. These issues are why I didn't pre-order Fenyx Rising like I planned to. It's not a good look when they can't get cutscenes working on their biggest game of the year.
The game is certainly unfinished. I think they rushed to get it out on time with the new console release. They clearly obsessed with programming new features and not polishing the old.
Ngl, I loved Odyssey. Found it really engaging and there was so much to do, and each time do differently. I've completed Vahalla (I always do a speed run) and am trying to redo it doing all the extra stuff, and I'm already bored. I do enjoy the combat, especially when you unlock the right skills when it works (so.many.bugs) but the lack of actual, meaningful side quests, no rewards for killing bosses, no one handed swords (I'm going to keep bringing that up until its patched in...) buggy movements, weird graphical errors/delayed rendering, mess of a skill tree, no real investment in the hidden ones/order of ancients conflict, no reward for killing bosses, boring raids, no mass field battles (odyssey's conquest battles would have been really fun here), weird bow aiming, oversized weapons and lack of gear (they've gone from one extreme to another) . Most insulting of all actually, is the lack of inclusivity for player choice. I've mentioned this in another post, but while playing as a male Eivor, I have maanny times now been referred to as a women. It's immersion breaking, and kinda a slap in the face. Like I get there's a 'Canon' gender, but it was the same with Odyssey with Kassandra being the 'Canon' option, but they at least made an effort to make sure when playing thy game, you couldn't tell. Valhalla is supposed to build on odyssey's rpg mechanics and it just doesn't. Like in Oddysey, when playing as Alexios, no one called you she, or her, and vice versa. Its really immersion breaking. Like think about how annoying it'd be if it was the other way round?
And to ubisoft's credit, they have acknowledged a lot of issues. Lack of one handed swords for one and the weird misgender pieces of dialogue for another. They have said they will add/fix these features, but they shouldn't be an issue when a game launches? We shouldn't be paying for a game, only for it to be finished months after release through patches.
Like the ubisoft dev team has my sympathy as they likely were rushed by the producers, but still...
gentester 64 posts
my issues with the game playing on PC
So many bugs, I've lost count of the times I have had to save and reload to get something to complete and still several things are completely borked in my game as the quest has stalled for no apparent reason (in latest one killed the person i was supposed to kill, body has vanished, area can't be cleared from being cursed because game doesn't recognise protagonist is dead in spite of me getting the quest reward, so I can't complete the mysteries for that area and am having to reload a save from nearly 10 hours previous to give it another go) .
My bird is a complete waste of time, no idea why its even there any more. I loved the system in both Origin and Odyssey where you could send your bird to scout - properly scout not just take a quick glance in the appropriate direction - and then mark your enemy, work out your routes to get from a to b in full stealth hit your target and vanish into the mist. Completely impossible in Valhalla. Far as I can see the raven might just as well be a bit of jewellery.
The sound is awful, most esp in snow. Stealth in snow sounds like you are stomping around in army boots and jumping up and down on crisp packets and bubble wrap. Boat songs are dire, so many really good viking/norse folk/rock groups out there and we get what sounds like 2 maybe 3 fairly generic dirgy things that all sound much the same compared to Odyssey where some proper research and proper music were evident. In fact the entire sound track for anything other than ambient is poor quality and underwhelming.
Collision is dire. I keep seeing NPC's happily standing 5 feet above ground.
They still haven't fixed the half hour pee, I assume bladder issues must have been endemic in Anglo Saxon times? Or the bandy legs, apparently the entire world suffered from bad knees back then, who knew?
And something that completely baffles me, you stealth your way into a place for a quest and run across prisoners. Locked behind wicker doors you can basically breathe heavily on to demolish - and all of these poor prisoners are still fully armed with two handed and one handed axes etc.
Erm Right... Does no one at Ubi think there might be something wrong there? You found prisoners in Origins/Odyssey and when you released them they went off to ostensibly find weapons or they ran away they didn't have them in the cages.
Valhalla smacks of a lot of lazy and rushed programming
Now I get it, they wanted to rush it out to beat CDPR to the punch, they wanted to take advantage of everyone being stuck in various stages of lockdown but really the game needed several more months of polish, what we have now is nowhere near as good at Odyssey was on release day.
scottyusceaser1 34 posts
@swedishelk The graphics are not great at all... the textures are very low detailed unless its the character models and tree's... and the Draw Distance is diabolical, the ground has no depth, it's all flat, the rocks are squared and unnatural looking.. this is 1000% Alpha...... looking into the distance in Valhalla is like looking at a ps1 game.. veeery low pixel and no grass or detail... but they hide it with fog
Raski0611 107 posts
Ubisoft made big mistake hiring the devs who created face animation and story in mass effect andromeda and put them in charge for audio and quality control in ac valhalla.
guest-udh6e0GF 2 posts
I agree this is an absolute horrible game in general and probably the worst in the series, full of bugs to the point it's not fun to play at all, the map and scenery is extremely boring, gameplay action is horrible the fighting is horrible the story is horrible the side missions are horrible. Anyone who says they enjoy this game I think are in denial because they sont want to admit they just wasted atleast 60$
Compared to odyssey it is an embarrassment in every aspect, lol even just the climbing is garbage
@guest-udh6e0gf Can't share your opinion.
Landscapes are awesome, I love the fighting, Parkour oppurtunities are back (mechanics are broken since Origins and still not fixed), story is extremly superior to Odysseys. I had to stop playing Odyssey and come back a year later to finish it. Enjoyed Valhalla from beginning to end. Side missions are nearly non existant but what's there is way better than anything you can find in Odyssey. (Randvi date, Petra mushroom trip etc., side quest unlocking "Mans best friend" ability)
I am so much looking forward for the DLCs
Edit: The problem at hand is more that you can't imagine that other people enjoy the game. This is a you problem.
@souldrinkerlp gotta disagree with you there.
Story falls short in Vahalla. It's disappointing and ends on such a anti-climax. Especially the historical ending.
I felt that Odyssey's ending (not including dlc) was far more satisfying and enjoyable and made a lot more sense. Vahalla literally ends before a massive event happens that changes the entire political structure of England-game wise it would have been a good place to end it as it set up a status quo in England that lasted for years. Odyssey's main story when there was peace for a few years between Athens and sparta, so it made sense for the narrative to end there. I've not been invested in the modern story of assassin creed for a while, but still didn't really like how they ended it.
Obviously this does come down to opinion, but just narrative-wise and historically, where it ends does not make sense nor is it satisfying
Some of the side quests in vahalla aren't great, besides a few exceptions.
I do enjoy the game, but it needs a lot of work and it needs improvement.
@max18400 There are only 5 side quests in total...
And story isn't just about the ending. The ending is in modern time. The story started with Layla going into the animus spoiler
Compare it to AC2. Ezios story wasn't finished obviously. Same with Altair in AC1. The reason why we go back in history isn't to get a satisfactory historical ending but to get something in modern time we expect there to be.
Of course I would wish for a second game with Eivor or a 2nd Season Pass. I like Eivor. But I don't need to see where his/her story ends to be satisfied. As the story is connected and that's exactly what I expect from an AC game. I would be fine with "the Ezio Treatment" for Eivor.
@souldrinkerlp only 5 exactly and I found myself rushing 3 of them. Besides a couple of ones, didn't find them too engaging.
To be fair, I appreciate a lot of people liked how the modern day arc ended, but personally I really didn't like it. At all. I could go into why, but it's never been an aspect of the series I've cared about. But that said, I did clearly say I wasn't invested in the modern day story at all. The end to Eivor's story in Chippenham (after Norway) is the ending that grated on me the most for the reasons I've already said.
@souldrinkerlp but then again, I disagree with you. Back with the Ezio trilogy, it was a very different story. Modern day was more engaging, and each game, Ezio's stories ended in a full arc. AC 2, he had defeated rodrigo and saw the futility in his vengeance--satisfying place for his personal story to end. AC brotherhood, ended with Ezio fully embracing his role as a leader, killing the antagonist and ending with a satisfactory ending for Ezio in that story. Revelations is the definitive end to Ezio's story, again seeing he had played his part and it was time to retire-again a satisfying end. Those games are like Ezio's story is a burger. The modern day complimented it and added to it, the salad of a burger for example. For example, when a new ac is advertised, it isn't the modern day that front and center, it's the historical narrative. The modern story is just an extra. A reason they can explore different historical settings.
Eivor's story is just meh. Especially when they have no investment in the conflict of assassin vs templars (or hidden ones vs the order). Compare this to Ezio's trilogy, its of even Odyssey's story, they had a direct motive and ambition to play their parts in that overarcing war. Also, Eivor ends as a political leader within the viking occupied area of England, and the last missions he is directly involved with trying to complete the conquest of England. That it ends before that war is finished is incredibly anti climatic. If they ended it with the battle of Edington, it always the settlement to be more of less secure and also would have paved the way for the DLCs to Ireland and Frankia.
@max18400 The personal Eivor story arc basically begins with Sigurd rescueing Eivor and ends with Eivor rescueing Sigurd. What happens after the last Modern Day section is just an epilogue. Mainly to finish off the Order and Settlement story.
I feel the personal ending for Eivor was satisfactory. I wanted to play more Ezio and in Rome after AC2. They went that way with Brotherhood. So I felt like the story wasn't finished yet too with AC2.
I felt the same with nearly every AC game. They could all continue. Especially Origins. Many people would have loved a second game with Bayek.
And yea, I am all for Eivor getting the Ezio Treatment (getting sequels)
@souldrinkerlp I understand what you're saying, but that epilogue was one of the best bits of gameplay I felt. I was thinking through it thinking, oh my god, they're going to end at Edington, that's perfect. Then they just didn't. The event they end on wasn't even historically a battle. The sack of Chippenham, Alfred had very few supporters with him and fled. The vikings under Guthrum then occupied Chippenham until they were defeated at Edington. They could have ended with the battle of Edington, where potentially Eivor could have lost a lot of friends and allies, meant you could replay in some areas and almost do a conquest/major conquest battles to retake them. It would have been a darker end, but always would have been a secure ending as it essentially created a form of peace between the settled vikings and Anglo-Saxons and would have allowed Eivor to return to Raventhorpe.
I don't think they'll do another game with Eivor to continue their story. It's plausable, but I don't think it's likely, especially with one DLC (Paris) being on a set date years after the main campaign ends
@max18400 They could do a 2nd season pass And maybe it's just bugged. Considering you can only complete the game 94%. Something IS missing in the game currently. Either it was cut or it is bugged. The seer also foreshadows that the village will burn and people will die if Eivor continues. So maybe it will come with a free update later?
@souldrinkerlp can only hope. I'm an a huge history nerd, especially on the viking age. I almost did a PhD on it (until I found out there was no funding at the moment) so I was always going to be a bit of a stickler with it, but I was just disappointed.
We can only hope that's the plan
@max18400 But you have to be honest here. AC2 didn't had a huge historical story. The history was just "existing" basically. It conveniently helped the plot sometimes etc. but it wasn't the main focus. Same basically with Black Flag. It only showed a very narrow perspective of pirate history (mostly Blackbeard and his crew)
You could basically make 4-5 games like Black Flag to tell the whole story of things happening during that age.
I feel like AC Valhalla does tell us way more history than AC2 did tbh. Which is why I want a second season pass with at least 1 DLC in England tbh. I want MORE of it because it is so good. I want them to tell me more of this because they delivered a very interesting story. (I read most of the actual history during AC Valhalla by now and they did not stick 100% to the actual history but this fits AC because it is telling "the real history" and not the one we believe in today because it is the most likely version etc.)
So if they make a poll about second season and having more England stuff count me in
They could never make any history game 100% historically accurate. It would have a too niche audience. All the games have simplified so many aspects to make when qualify as a video game l: and also to make it appropriate for a modern audience.
That said, the AC games should, and for the most part, do loosely follow history. Ezio and black flag did portray some really great historical events, but for the most part were on the fringes of the historical periods (AKA not around a major historical event), whereas the last 3 games are very closely linked. For example, origins showing the assassination of Caesar,or Odyssey's Athenien plague.
I hope they add it in as the free dlc they're releasing later this month. Would make sense to (the real sack of Chippenham happened around Christmas/new year877/878, and the battle of Edington was spring 878)