Welcome to discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • Sodda-
    11 posts

    Killing civilians in a Viking game?!?! *shocked pikachu face*

  • DreadGrrl
    165 posts

    Its interesting that you mention Rogue (which I love) and Blackflag (which I really dislike).

    Rogue did a terrific job of showing us that things weren’t black and white: the Assassins were just as dangerous as the Templars: if not more so. Shay was a terrific protagonist. It was easy to identify with him and his choice to join the Templars.

    Blackflag made it really obvious that Assassins weren’t good and virtuous people. Edward came across to me as a total dirtbag. He was a fraud. I’d argue that Bayek was the only Assassin who actually was a decent person who truly wanted to help people.

    In Valhalla, it looks like we might have another dirtbag “Edward-style” protagonist. It muddies the water and blurs the line between good and evil.

    The Assassins aren’t the good guys. The Templars aren’t the good guys. The good guys are those who are caught in the middle (maybe the Eagle Bearer qualifies as a “good guy” by the end?) and die by the thousands when things go sideways in the Assassin/Templar conflict.

    I’m just hoping that the story gets interesting soon. I’m forcing myself to play it.

  • Achilleus-
    Original poster 17 posts

    All AC approached the protagonist from a Kantian form of honor or deontology. Even Black Flag and Rogue. They were congruent.

    Eivor’s : “LEAVE NO HOUSE UNBURNED!” cry,... as they raze Earnningstone, with civillian women and children running away. As he remarks how much he loves the smell of burning homes.

    It’s sick. No other AC game had this lack of virtue. You are metaphorically the executioner of Ezio’s family in this game. There is no honor in this. I want to be an Englishman taking revenge on Eivor, not be Eivor.

    I don’t care what narrative you mold this into.

    I don’t need to strangle a small child to death with my hands, seeing the spark of life go out in their eyes at the moment of their death, to have to be told it is wrong and I should change my ways.

    I wish I never bought this game. It makes me hate Eivor and wish for his death. Forget identifying with the protagonist.

    Every AC game is better than this. Including Liberation.

  • cawatrooper9
    38 posts

    @achilleus While I agree that Eivor's attacks on monastaries can seem pretty dark, I think it was at least clever to tie them to the building of your own settlement.

    Yes, you're destroying, but there's also an element of creation there as well.

  • RainbowAshii
    16 posts

    @achilleus Don't play it. Problem solved.

  • Achilleus-
    Original poster 17 posts


    Yeah. I just never thought it would get to me, but it feels like a betrayal by Ubisoft. I have bought all AC games the moment they came out since 2007(!). So I know the overall vibe of AC.

    In the first AC’s you play someone who is out to kill evil people for vengeance, people who have killed his family, etc. In Origins and Odyssey you play a Medjay and Misthios who are PROTECTORS of people. People go to them for help.

    I’m just 8 or 10 hours into Valhalla so I probably haven’t seen the worst of it yet. I mean when they capture that priest and Eivor and the others stand in front of him when he says he believes in God and they just slit his throat. A priest just standing there.

    To be a simple pillager like this who enjoys torturing and killing priests who are praying and burning innocent people’s homes made me feel sick. It reminded me of some of the sickest things on the internet I’ve seen (like the Dagestan video) or read (like the confession of convicted child murderer Pedro Alonso Lopez who I quoted from in my last post). It literally made me feel as sick as those things.

    I love the AC franchise and buy the games as soon as they are released but getting players to identify with a protagonist like this really was a punch in the stomach.

    And forget me: there’s probably a bunch of kids who are underage who will play this and be affected by it. The entire Valhalla game is like “No Russian” in COD.

    It’s like this time you are the person you hated and fought against in all prior AC games.

    Anyway I’m done ranting, but I felt Ubisoft should know how some players feel.

  • cawatrooper9
    38 posts

    @achilleus I totally understand.

    A lot of times, if you've had to do violence, the games have had more of a consequence for it- such as Ezio's regret at burning Cappadocia, or Shay's anger at how loosely the Assassins were playing with the temples.

    Though I'm not sure Odyssey was as innocent in this. The misthios was so violent that killing innocents didn't even cause desynch, and their loyalties were to the highest bidder.

  • Achilleus-
    Original poster 17 posts

    True. Although Odyssey didn’t desync if you killed a civillian, it never forced you to. Even Socrates who lamented that you killed guards to free him (even though you could just knock them out and not kill them) every person you “had to” kill was either a soldier, bandit or a mercenary in Odyssey. They were all armed or evidently evil.

    In Valhalla the narrative forces you to burn homes of just normal unarmed bystanders, literally women and children running away screaming from their homes that you burn (commenting how you love the smell of burning homes). Or executing unarmed priests who are prisoners or just standing in front of you.

    Just breaks immersion for me although I can see how other people might not really care.

  • ballon009
    9 posts

    The fact you mention this, is a testament to the fact this is just Viking simulator. Honestly it does a good job representing what a viking would do. Note thou that eivor really is not that bad of a viking. He is more like haythem if haythem was an assassin.

    He kills only those who stand in the way of his nordic life. This is not good nor evil. Its designed as a foil- as as OD to some extent. Its designed to show you the templars are not good nor are the assassins bad. They just represent order and chaos.

    Spoilers- Desmond states this in the first 15 hours of the act

  • UltimatePowa
    61 posts

    How does it break your immersion that a Viking is doing Viking things?

    Do you expect the Vikings to go and have tea with the people at the monasteries and ask them to give the Vikings their stuff?

    Also Honor for Vikings was different than Honor to us.

    It was in fact honorable to slaughter a monastery full of innocent men, for battle, was the greatest honor.
    What was dishonorable to the Vikings, was not participating in the raids, I.E. slaughter.

    They didn't slaughter women though, they would just capture them and make them concubines.
    Children were usually captured as slaves or adopted if they were young enough.

Suggested Topics

Community Details