h8_breeder 1 posts
They won't add it. Why? Look at the way all one handed weapons come out and are out away. Same side. With a one handed sword they would have to change the entire animation system for one handed weapons. Doubt they will. Also, swords were almost useless against shielded enemies, hence the beard on a bearded axe to pull the shield away. Only hope a sword has is to stab, and a Seax doesn't that faster and better.
Yesin069 465 posts
You are right! I forgot that Eivor has all his one handed weapons on his right side. That would mean Ubisoft needs to do new animations to pull out a one handed sword from the left-side with the right hand. This is some type of effort i dont think Ubisoft will ever do. Great publishers and devs would absolutely do that after a game is launched but not Ubisoft.
I dont care if a weapon would be effective or not because this is no For Honor. I just want a one-handed sword because i like to have this weapon in every medieval game i ever played. It is my preferred weapon and every game in this setting ticks this box and have those swords in it.
Sadly this is another thing that shows us how Ubisoft lost the passion and love in making games. They didn't implement one-handed swords because they needed to unsheat this weapon from an deifferent angle which needed individual new animations just for this weapon. Instead every other one-handed weapon is equipped on the right side and also picked up by Eivors right hand. they dont do more work as needed and the golden rule is efficency and reusing assets and animations as often as possible.
When I look at the effort Ubisoft put into just Notre Dame in Unity I don't know what happened to this company. Microtransactions and live-service games really ruined them and all the little details that were in AC games (mostly in the enviroments) are gone by now. Valhalla has a lot of copy and pasted areas with no love and care at all put into them. I see reused assets everywhere.
Max18400 393 posts
@h8_breeder... This isn't right... At all. There's a reason warriors preferred swords. They were versatile weapons, arguably more so than axes. So sorry... Swords were not useless against shields. That argument is ridiculous. Talk to anyone who does historical reenactment, there's pros and cons to using an axe and sword. Swords were quicker and could actually get around a shield's protection. They could conversely just hit it out of the way or out msnouver it. Swords were also capable of breaking shields... Especially decently made swords. It would make more sense not having seaxs as they (despite what the last kingdom says) were not main weapons in warfare
And if doing that very simple animation (they can literally just recycle the animation from any previous ac game), is the reason they won't add them, that's pathetic and new low for ubisoft
longjohn119 426 posts
@yesin069 I played both Origins and Odyssey with a sword as my melee weapon and used the secondary melee weapon for it's engraving boosts only .... About the only time I ever used anything other that a sword for melee was the occasional weekly ori quests where they wanted you to kill 'x' number of solder with a spear or heavy blunt .... In Origins I got the Deluxe version and pretty much used the poisoned sword that came with it through the entire game and it also had a poisoned heavy blunt which I like to use on the Phylakes by ambushing them from behind and whacking them with it to start out, ride past turn and shoot a few arrows at them to stun them and then whack them again with it ..... I only used a shield against a couple of the bosses where it was a necessity ..... A good sword and a good bow and I'm set
AlphaGoose46219 144 posts
@madness3v3 All real fighters used one handed swords, speed and even a bit of distance from your enemy makes it far more effective than the lumberjack ax.
UBIsoft; no we go for the wood chopper, ridiculous big (man-sized) axes, two handed monsters, hammers heads so big they must weight 25 pounds.
It makes me laugh if i see Vili walking with his ridiculous ax, looks like a fool instead of a tough viking warrior.
If you see all the posts about this (forum, youtube, community) it is amazing nobody at UBIsoft wakes up.
Asgardian02 1932 posts
all the hammers in the game have a ridiculously design.
The hammer heads of all those hammers are far too big and as a result would weigh too much much for eivor to swing that hammer around.
For game trying to be historical realistic there is just way too much incorrect.
Hence why i dont understand why they want to even make historical accurate.
jamkillerj3lly 3 posts
Hey guys! Are you adding 1h Swords to the game and will you be able to play them in the Normal game? I don't want to play the game untill it has 1h swords as I always love playing RPG's with swords. Thanks.
Yesin069 465 posts
We have to wait and see how they implement a new weapon type witth the first dlc. Shortswords are already confirmed for the second dlc in summer.
If they do it well, than even non-season pass owners will get a free quest which gives them the new weapon and also one weapon to buy from the merchant at least.
If they do it the greedy Ubisoft way, than you need to have the season pass and also wont get this weapon type in another way (except microtransactions of course).