boo-yah1907 174 posts
@gvo872 already did, asked for my money back still waiting for an answer. It was not the product that was promised, right from the start. Could not move, falling through the map or flying of the map, suicidal enemies, crashes(many more but got tired). For the case of refund they say its "2 HOURS" on the store page. Here is my issue with that, as long as the product in question has guarantee(in other words, resumes to receive "service/support") and you have receipt as a customer, refund is possible(unless there is a customer mistake to be found, but that goes for pyhsical products). PC(download). Just want my money back, wont visit the forums or talk like this anywhere after that, just want nothing to do with this game.
CapnKel 11 posts
@adarklore No doubt a lot of folks playing the game are descended from the north men, as am I. The Norse definitely left a lasting impact on society that's still felt today. Impressive when you consider how long its been since they were at their height.
And of the three RPG style Assassin's Creed games, I wholeheartedly agree that Valhalla is the worst of the lot. But worst game of all time? Not by a long shot. There are lots of games out there that are more deserving of that title. In spite of all the bugs and glitches, which are numerous and annoying, I'm still enjoying myself.
You make an interesting point about vikings and civilians (which love to get in the way during fights). I suppose that since Eivor is an assassin, he/she must follow all of their tennants, one of which being they must not kill the innocent. Then again, stealth is so bad in this game at times that one cannot help but wonder if we truly are playing an assassin. I've certainly seen a lot of people deflect from this by saying Eivor is a viking, not a trained assassin, but if that were really true...
Someone in another thread hypothesized that it's all due to Ghost Recon Breakpoint, Ubi's failed attempt at games as a service. Considering how badly it flopped, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they were right. Their hypothesis goes on to further state that this is why so much of what were used to is missing from Valhalla. Ubi devs realized how badly they had botched up and in order to not further antagonize the player base, stripped the game of its most egregious aspects last minute. Then there is the pandemic to consider, which I mentioned in my previous comment. When resources and schedules are strained is a bad time to try something new. Hopefully they'll have learned some valuable lessons and the next game will be better.
ADarklore 121 posts
@capnkel I think the next game will definitely be better IF the studio who developed Odyssey is the one to create it! The studio who created this buggy mess called Valhalla, shouldn't be allowed to develop ANYTHING again!! Considering the Odyssey had very few bugs/glitches and by the end, was a polished machine. I didn't start playing it until the game was completely done, but have NEVER had any bugs whatsoever in any of my numerous playthroughs. This game, however, is still filled with so many bugs even almost a YEAR later!! I like it to a woven tapestry... the design started out and then along the way someone got off course, so the design became muttled... so instead of unraveling the entire mess that it became, they just decided to muddle along until the tapestry was declared DONE. UBI has a history of this, not being able to fix the bugs in their game, so they just muttle along and when service life is done, they leave the buggy mess as it is and move on to the next game. It's a shame they allow this one studio to further tarnish their reputation instead of learning which studios are capable, which are not, and cut the one that's problematic.
I have put well over a hundred hours into this game and have just finished the arc where Oswald gets married. However, I'm sitting with fully leveled ration and quiver, settlement is a bit over 5, and I have 380 skill points, almost all of this just from exploring, raiding here and there, collecting gold locations. Yet, I have seen SO many glitchy things and even several bugs myself that I required either reverting to a previous save or reloading SEVERAL times over and over before the bug disappeared. Example... "Have you seen this man" quest where you have to lead Petra to her brother. I reached a point where she yells, "follow me" up out of the underground location... and I did follow her... only to find her standing there, icon over her head, but would not move and I couldn't interact with her! I checked online, found that this quest has been bugged since the beginning of the game- and can glitch out at any point during it... and STILL has not been fixed. My only recourse was to reload from a point in the quest before I reached that underground area... and knowing she would abruptly run out... I was prepared to run! I ended up making it out of the location before her... and then was able to interact with her and finish the bizarre quest. Then last night I decided to try the Asgard arc, I went to talk to Valka... and she wasn't there!! Oh, but the ICON was... but it kept moving, jittering all over the screen, telling me she was 250M below me, but that number kept fluctuating as I moved around trying to find her. I ended up reloading FOUR TIMES, before she finally showed up and I was able to start the story. Then there was the quest where rogue vikings attack your settlement and you need to kill them all to trigger a cutscene... I killed them all... but no cutscene! I ran around my settlement for 15 minutes thinking there was one hiding somewhere- only to find online many people had this problem- I had to reload from before that quest and the second time I was able to trigger the cutscene. Then I was in Cent and found an NPC floating up into the air, spinning like she was in a tornado, but nobody else was seeing it... I even sent my raven up to get a view and sure enough, an NPC hovering and spinning in the air by the church. Just SO MANY things that are messed up with this game and apparently cannot be fixed because somewhere along the line, the tapestry of coding has gotten tangled and the devs apparently don't even know where to begin unraveling to fix it, so they appear to be just muddling along... sadly... they plan to muddle along for another year!!
Which brings me to the next point... DO NOT expect much going forward. I would expect they are going to cut costs anyway they can because clearly, Valhalla is now a LOSING venture and they've already committed to another year of expenditure. I can say it's a losing venture because, based on the few people who even venture to, or comment on, the forums has dropped severely even with Siege of Paris having just came out recently. A healthy forum is, IMO, a good indicator of the number of people playing... and based upon the ghost town that the Valhalla forums have become, that speaks volumes IMO. I think far too many people are tired of the bugs and glitches that never get fixed, and just refuse to return even when new content is added- especially if they are dealing with an unfixed bug that prohibits them from moving forward. I would also venture to guess, part of the cost savings, they've reduced their staff and have fewer devs working on the game... which is why it takes MONTHS for a patch to fix simple problems like keybind issue that suddenly developed after previous patch (which is why I hadn't returned to playing earlier as a previous patch rendered stealth unusable because the crouch option disappeared). I too reach a point where I get tired of their glitchy mess and leave... I return a few months later and 'try again'. For me, I return SOLELY because of the viking aspect, if this were any other time period, I would not continue playing this game.
Until NG+ is added, I will NOT start a new game... PERIOD! I've worked very hard for the silver, runes, skills and equipment that I have... I'm not going to start over and struggle. I replayed Odyssey over EIGHT times because I enjoyed the fact I could keep making Kassandra or Alexios even stronger, I also enjoyed the Mercenary aspect... with Valhalla, once the Zealots are finished... BLAH; I think they should have more random tough opponents like the Mercenaries in Odyssey.
As mentioned earlier, I just started the Asgard arc last night and absolutely HATE IT! I mean, seriously, such a small area and you don't think they would notice 'patrols' of Jotun? Example... I have to test The Builder's shield so I'm to draw a patrol of Jotun to it? Huh? So we KNOW there are Jotun, but have done nothing about it?!? So yeah, I draw them in, and suddenly am FLOODED with Jotun attacking me!! This makes absolutely NO SENSE and completely ruined the entire arc for me because it made me realize the completely lack of rationale that went into the storyline would most likely continue through the arc; I hate where there is such a glaring hole in the story. As if Odin, who sees all, wouldn't have a clue that Jotun are running rampant in his tiny space that is Asgard... I mean, like, he could look down from above and SEE THEM patrolling! So stupid, and I don't do STUPID. I'm willing to suspend disbelief only so far, and this broke that completely. I mean, even in Odyssey when they added the stupid Atlantis arc, it wasn't done nearly as bad as this... and I've barely started it and am already over it. That should also say something about the difference between the writers... Odyssey vs Valhalla.
So while I agree Valhalla is not the 'worst' game... it's pretty close. The development of this game has been a mess, they don't seem to have a clue how to fix it, they continue to just plug along most likely having already lost any true enthusiasm for this game clearly by now knowing they cannot fix it. The game director doesn't seem to have a clue as to what people like, don't like, because refusing to add NG+ would keep people playing- which is something many many people aren't doing anymore. Saying that they "don't know how it would work" tells me the guy doesn't have a clue what he's doing- as this is a conversation that should have been there from the very beginning and the game should have been coded for it! He's probably trying to save face, trying to maintain enthusiasm for the sake of revenue, when clearly NG+ isn't the only thing they don't know how to add or fix. How could you NOT have thought of basic, standard features, when in the initial planning stages of the game?!? Again... studio that developed Odyssey vs studio that developed the buggy mess called Valhalla... one has a clue, the other clearly doesn't. It's very disheartening and difficult to have any type of hope for the future development of this game given almost a year and the game is still a mess.
TORFINR 364 posts
The thing is that the very core of Valhalla is bad. The skills, the evolution of the character, the stats, the fluidity of the combats, the activities beyond the story, everything that makes the backbone of a game is poorly designed. All those elements feel like small features glued together artificially. The result is an uninteresting mess of gameplay elements which would be acceptable in a free mobile RPG but not in a AAA title. Everything else but graphics in Valhalla feels amateurish.
thegardener25 110 posts
@capnkel There's nothing that impressive about the norse time in britain, they're just one more group in a series of invaders/conquerers/boat people/refugees/settlers, that left a footprint. Then the british would later go on & dish out the same crap to other nations around the world. There's nothing great, or impressive about any of it. "Ah, but what about the place names, 'thorpe' & towns, or villages that end in 'by', or the fact that a day of the week is named after the almighty Thor! 'Thursday"?
The norse, or vikings travelled, explored & traded, they made some great weapons, their art & carvings were brilliant, & they told great stories about the exploits of their gods to their kids over the fire, & when they had sufficient numbers for an attack (great heathen army), they were 'a force to be reckoned with' (cliche - but I just can't heap praise on those dogs, man). I cannot stand this tide that has come across lately in TV, Film, & games, including Ubisoft & more disapointingly the team that were given the green light to go ahead with this unfortunate 'AC' game, have ridden along with this idea that the vikings were misrepresented in the history books. Just to say it out loud, THE VIKINGS WEREN'T BRAVE, COURAGEOUS WARRIOR'S! THEY WERE CHANCERS, OPPORTUNISTS & SHIGHTBAGS! They did travel from their homeland to discover & in search of a better life, they traded. But don't give them too much credit for the lands that they conquered! The norse/Norwegians, knew the North & North West Scottish island groups. The Shetland & Orkney Islands. The Inner & Outer Hebrides. If the vikings wanted to 'Take Scotland' (although at the time Scotland as a country didn't yet exist) They had a massive coastline on the NorthEast coast of britain which would have been so much easier to reach than travelling around the treacherous waters of the Northern coast. So why didn't they invade the East coast of Scotland (inhabited by the Picts)? Probably because they knew what they were up against., & although the Northern Isles were Pictish lands. The inhabitants of these islands were cut off from any kind of support or reinforcement! You see, the whole of mainland britain, although peace pacts would be made from time to time, there was always a threat of invasion from neighbouring tribes. Scotland has hundreds, if not thousands of Lochs (lakes), & a way of reducing the threat of overnight attacks from nearby enemies, was to build houses on stilts off the shores of the Lochs, these were called Crannogs. (You can see an example on the SouthEast entrance to 'Bomere Lake' in Sciropescire, in the game). And no doubt many that wanted out & away from the threat of attack would have felt safer living on an island away from the mainland, & as I mentioned previously, they were far away from the threat of mainland attack, they were also far from their support. So, the idea that vikings conquering these islands paints them as superior has to be taken with a snow shovel fulla salt. I don't particularly care that much about them raiding monasteries (although, not raised christian, I was fed christian bumf throughout my childhood, but I'm still not a christian!). Vikings (as many portray them as being the ultimate baderses) hitting a monastery, is akin to a bunch of teenage/early twenties skinheads raiding an old peoples home to rob them of their 'Prize Bingo' Prizes, & their evening pudding! The norse didn't invade & conquer. The vast majority were let in (because they were known traders & probably trusted). As for them not being known for stealth. Well it was a few centuries later, that the Thistle became the Flower of Scotland, due to a viking raiding party taking off their boots to sneak up on a Scottish camp who were asleep in the early hours, only to step on the Thistle, their [censored] ersed screeches alerting the Scots & the attackers were put to rest. As I said earlier, the Film, TV & games media is responsible for completely rewriting, falsifying history & all these clowns that have watched some of these shows, movies & played these games feeling pride that, I am a product of this proud race need to give themselves a good hard headbutt against the nearest hard surface, to waken themselves up! As for Thursday? The place names? I reckon they were let go, because the pagan festivals continued after christianisation. There probably wasn't anybody that could be bothered setting up a committee to change the name of a day of the week.
Also, Eivor isn't an Assassin. She was given a Hidden Blade, was talked to for probably less than 2 mins & shown some dummies. Later was shown the leap of faith, was asked for Order trinkets by Hytham, but Eivor isn't an assassin! I savoured those moments when I entered those Hidden Ones Bureau's. Before I interacted with any of the notes,. I took time to light every light source in the rooms, & the lead up. I burnt every cobweb away, because I thought, or hoped that Eivor would be bringing these Bureaus back into daily use, by maybe recruiting Assassin's & learning/training to become one herself. But alas, it wasn't to be. What a waste! & Ubisoft, don't bother now! Just like coming to Scotland. You absolutely shet on us. I don't want you coming here as an afterthought. Stay away. My apologies for the devs that did a great job on what was asked of them. But year 2 on this game is polishing the turd.
danpeacock76 1 posts
Wrath of the druids keeps saying new quest all the time when there isn't one! Its been an absolute messy buggy joke! I won't rush n buy the next one!
pesto. 152 posts
Gonna have to disagree with the OP here. I like the game, I just feel like it’s been plagued by more bugs than previous AC’s (Unity notwithstanding).
Honestly it’s biggest problem is that it is so promising. Many mechanisms seem like a great start with so much potential but then end up being far too shallow.
It shouldn’t become a chore or grind but there needs to feel some depth, RDR2 is a great example of both taking it too far and doing it just right, having to feed and clean your cowboy and horse became too much for no reward, but having a deep hunting system with many animals, wind, scent, bait, stealth, hit-zones and damage from different weapons and an economy with different vendors based around harvesting from them as a side activity was great. It could even have been deeper with involving the process onwards from harvested materials to weapons and clothing like monster Hunter.
AC has become too shallow. Imagine if the assassination aspect was as in depth as Hitman, required the planning and setups from GTA Heists. Or what if you could utilize price differences between different vendors to turn a side profit hustle, and if their prices would reflect events in the story or player actions. What if training your horse involved actually riding it, and upgrading it involved as many pieces of armor, saddles and stirrups and cosmetics as the player had. What if the rats mechanism wasn’t just a blocking mechanism but as fully realized as the rats in A Plague Tale. Imagine if reputation mattered, that killing everyone might be counterproductive when you want to spread fear. Imagine if forts had better AI that gave you the chance to stop altering everyone by intercepting those trying to spread the word, and if enemies were more frequently scared by your actions, if one attack failed spectacularly such as shooting arrows at you they then tried a different strategy. If underwater and cave traversal resulted in opening up new opportunities and map paths rather than just being loot pools. If your boat was more use, and had more than two songs…
show_stoppa 52 posts
@lj4mma Origins was awesome. Odyssey was nice and I liked the story and the gear system, But I just couldnt get over the fact that you didnt have a hidden blade. Valhalla is nice too, though the story could have been a bit more intriguing.
As for the worst AC game, I think Valhalla is much better than Syndicate, Rogue, and AC3.
And if sales are anything to go buy, I dont see them changing the formula.
Freestepper 111 posts
@show_stoppa What is hidden blade good for if the game is more fun anyway? As soon as hidden blade was announced for Valhalla, i immediately expected the assassination animations to be boring again, as they always was. Just stab in the back, etc... And as i expected, Valhalla has boring assassination animations. They was way more fun in Odyssey. And i don't get why everyone says that Odyssey doesn't feel like Assassin's Creed only because it doesn't have hidden blade. There are many more aspects that makes Assassin's Creed game the Assassin's Creed. After playing Odyssey, i stopped wanting the hidden blade in next AC game, because those assassination animations was way more fun without it.