Assassin's Creed: Odyssey Announced - Set in ancient Greece

So a new Assassin's Creed has already been announced. Apparently it will let you choose your gender, and will have a dialogue system so it's safe to say it's expanding upon the RPG elements present in Origins. Anyway, I got some questions for everybody

1. How do you feel about Ubisoft potentially putting the franchise back on an annual assembly line? I'm personally disappointed and was hoping they'd take their time.

2. Do you think the ability to choose your gender is telling that the story won't be that deep or involved? It looks to me like they're going the Far Cry 5 route, with a blank slate character which the player assumes, rather than an Ezio-esque set in stone protagonist.

3. What do you think about ancient Greece as a setting?

Thanks.

I'm not a huge fan of Assassin's Creed, but here's my two pence.

1. They shouldn't do annual releases of AC. People get burnt out too easily and it's better to build the hype a little bit.

2. For roleplaying purposes, it's always better to be able to select your gender. For storytelling purposes, it's better to force one or the other. That being said, I don't play games where you have to play a woman because I struggle to get into the character as much. It baffles me when men choose to play women, but each to their own.

3. Greece is the next logical step after Egypt. Plus, Greece has a load of islands, so they can bring the sailing stuff back.

Honestly, AC doesn't interest me that much. One set in Greece has my attention though.

Origins is rad as hell so I'm instantly ready for more Assassin's Creed again.

Unfortunately Origins is rad as hell so that means the cycle dictates that this next game will be gaaaaaaaaaarbage.

I'm also immensely disappointed in blank slate characters if thats what they're doing since they would be coming directly off of the best character they've had yet.

1. Ambivalent. It seems like the time off did the series some good, but I don't typically think these games feel rushed or anything; there was just some general series fatigue. I'm cool with this one seemingly coming out this year, but they'll run into the same problem if they truly go back to an annual model.

2. I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. It's not like they have to make two entirely different games or something; just tweak some stuff here and there. AC protagonists are typically lame anyway. Then again, I'm in the very small minority that liked Connor better than any of the others, so take that as you will.

3. I like it. That 4 second announcement of kicking a dude off a cliff cracked me up. Yelling dumb stuff from 300 over this while I'm playing it seems like a good time, and the era allows for some quality battle stuff.

I'm sorta in the Vinny camp where Origins no longer felt like an AC game to me anymore. Plenty of people that disliked the series for ages were stoked it played different, but for people such as myself that enjoyed the original gameplay just fine the departure into a more generic action RPG was a bummer. Maybe they can find a better balance in this new release.

As for the setting itself I'm fairly indifferent towards it. They keep avoiding feudal Japan despite it being the one setting that super makes sense and would be rad as hell to playthough because they think it's too cliche and thats a shame. Greece ehh I dunno sure... I'm guessing there will be a colosseum arena thing in there and some gladiator-inspired storylines. The story in Origins was honestly so poor and incredibly sparse that anything they'll do in Odyssey will surely be a step up. I know that this time I won't make the mistake of buying it for the PS4 because my base non-pro edition made large chunks of Origins really unfun to play with the framerate dropping to around 12FPS during most combat encounters or anytime fire was present on screen.

Climb to the top of a column to survey the objectives then dive into a hay filled cart. There, I played it for you.

Setting the game in Greece makes sense historically. The, uh, events at the end of AC: Origins happen right before the Roman civil war, much of which takes place in Greece. I'm sure we will see Octavian(Augustus), Marc Antony, Cleopatra, etc., and I'm sure Octavian is a Templar.

The quick turn around time is troubling news to me. I definitely don't trust the Assassins Creed name and will always wait for reviews because of that fast iteration cycle.

I'm down with ancient Greece, but I hope the playable characters aren't blank slates. A big reason why Origins is so good is because Bayek is the fuckin man.

1. I'd prefer bi annual releases. AC/open world fatigue is real.

2. We don't know enough to have an opinion on the character stuff.

3. Ancient Greece sounds awesome.

I like the Greek idea, but truthfully I woudl have loved a Babylonian or Assyrian games first. I would have liked some truly ancient cultures done before we got to the greeks. Moreover, Ubi is really far to Eurocentric, where are the games about The Olmec Civilization or the Zapotec Civilization from MesoAmerica? How about any of the three to five Chinese civilizations that around 18, 000 to 7,000 years ago? Not commercial enough; well, how about well known but underprepensted civilizations like the Maya or Aztec of teh Americas, the Zulu of Africa or Xia Dynasty opf China. Want an sure bet? How about staying in the Nile regions with a game set in Nubia or Kush! Believe me calling a game Assassin's Creed : Pure, Lush Kush will sell! ;-)

Look they can do an annual franchise of this if they want and chances are I will continue to play all of them. However I feel like if the rumors I'm hearing surrounding this are true it could be interesting.

Dialog options, if meaningful, could really lend a nice twist to the series. Ancient Greece is an interesting enough place to have an AC game though I can't remember what happened to Greece after Rome took over but I do remember Athens still being the forefront of knowledge during the Roman age.

In answer to your questions:

1.) I don't like it as there are definitely some lessons they could be learning from Origins to put into Odyssey but it doesn't deter my excitement.

2.) I think being a generic ass Assassin makes more sense as you can have other characters that push the story forward that you are working for or with. It could allow for a more personal connection with the game than outright playing the main protagonist.

3.) Ancient Greece (aside from Crusade Era Medieval times) is my favorite in ancient history.

I'm uneasy about them going back to an annualized pipeline. The break worked out well for Origins and I'd rather they take their time.

As for the character selection stuff, the leaks I've read makes it sound more like a Dishonored 2/Syndicate style with two set possible characters rather than a "generic custom protagonist," so I'm not too worried about it making the story weaker or what have you. Also the story of the AC games has always been subordinate to the historical tourism for me, so I wouldn't care much either way.

I'm skeptical about the setting from a biome variety standpoint (Greece isn't that much different environmentally from the northern parts of the Origin map), but if there's a renewed focus on the boat stuff as per some of the Reddit leaks I don't think I'll mind much.

Ultimately I'm gonna play it despite my mild misgivings unless it turns out to be a completely broken mess. AC Origins somehow wound up being one of my favorite games of all time and I'm really interested to see how they build on it.

As an aside, as someone who has considered himself a fan of the AC series since the beginning, browsing the AC subreddit has shown me that the "true fanbase" has vastly different priorities about what makes a good AC game than I do, yeesh.

Do we have a release date yet? Maybe its actually *not* annualized but I could see Ubisoft going back to that. If that's the case, I'm sure there was another or at least a cross team working on that.

Origins is great and I really like it. No it may not be quite an "Assassin's Creed" game as we used to know it but I feel the series can evolve. I like the direction it went in and I hope to see more of it. I worry that AC fatigue could set in again but I don't think it would with another release right now, especially being Greece. That sounds really exciting.

This. So much this.

I'd be much more excited about this if it were announced next year. Origins was awesome, but I don't need more at the moment. I'll play it eventually if it lives up to Origins, though, just maybe not this year.

I adored AC:2, played Syndicate lately (My first since 2). Either I've changed or the game has, but I didn't really enjoy it at all. I've always been interested in ancient egypt, but after Syndicate I won't play it. Any new AC will probably pass me by.

To answer the OP

1) Annual releases are bound to reduce the quality of the game, but money talks. If they're happy with their engine and they sell, of course they'll do them every year.

2) Gender choice is fine, so long as the story works with that design choice. Considering the frankly piss-poor story of Syndicate, I can't see this one improving on it, so why not let people pick their gender. It's a selling point for them.

3) Greece is cool to me, but it's no Egypt. I think that people generally will go for it. It's a well known time period after all.

I feel like I barely beat Origins and have barely "scratched" end game content. So I really hate that it's back on the annual release track. When Origins came out, it was actually kind of exciting because there had not been an AC game for awhile and it was such a departure from the previous ones that it got my interest back in the series.

Being able to pick your gender in this one should be an interesting choice and with the supposed dialogue options now, I think that is a great option to have. Seems like we are going to be really building our characters this time than just taking the role of an established one. Which makes me somewhat worried because I feel that the way they handle characters in AC is actually pretty great. I like exploring these interesting characters in their respective time period. So hopefully again they take more influence from Witcher 3 and have dialogue options that reflect the character than say, the Bioware route which is supposed to define what kind of character you're playing.

I love Ancient Greece and the more that I see it in games is fine by me. My only question is what do they mean by "Ancient Greece"? Roman controlled Greece makes the most sense narratively as a continuation from Origins, but I would honestly rather it be further back in the Classical or Hellenistic periods in the 5th and 4th century B.C.E. .

I absolutely loved Origins, and the DLC was even pretty good, so yes, I am ready for another major one in around a year. After a couple of years I would hit sequel fatigue, but I still played every single one before Origins and overall enjoyed each one, so maybe it wouldn't matter anyways.

As long as there isn't some silly romance story crammed into the game, I'm not sure why the gender of the character would matter at all one way or the other. The story could still be rich and deep with just a few changed lines of dialogue (but lets be honest, its an AC game, so it wont be rich or deep no matter what).

Im cool with a new setting, but "ancient" Greece most likely just being Roman Greece is a little disappointing. Doesn't seem very probable that they would follow a game called Origins with a game that takes place even further in the past unfortunately. Would love to be able to see some mythological aspects be brought into the story, and the helmet and the title Odyssey make me feel like there might be something (two timelines?), but im not holding my breath that it wont just be a bunch of cities similar to Cyrene and Alexandria but with more islands and coastline

I understand that burnout can happen for some people, but I'm hyped, loved Origins, and from all the leaks I've read, I think I'll love this too. Everyone's gotta remember that it's not like they make these games in 1 year. Ubisoft have multiple studios so while 1 studio was working on Origins for like 4 years another was working on Odyssey for a few years, and not like "oh they made Origins and in 1 year made Odyssey hugely reusing assets etc." Love the direction of Origins and this one is shaping up to be even better!

1. It's unfortunate if they shifted back into that mode, but it's possible that when they were making Origins they were also working on this, no?

2. The dialogue choices may well contradict that notion. Though in order to have both, it seems to me they'd have to ditch the whole "reliving the past precisely as it occurred" conceit. Or just brush that all aside narratively and say whatever gender and choices you made is what the history was. As somewhat historical games (though largely fantasy) I think it's pretty funny for them to shift to "fuck it, make the past whatever you want." In-universe it makes sense though. Seems like something you'd expect Abstergo to be down with.

In fact, wasn't that already a minor plot point in a past AC game? Abstergo hiding the truth by recontextualizing/altering history as presented? Seems like the kinda thing they'd have touched on but never really explored. But then that also makes you being able to do that fully in this game kinda weird, unless, ah fuck it. I should give up on them ever telling a good science-fictiony story with the modern stuff. Fucking video games. Just let Juno destroy the world already.

Speaking to my own gameplay preferences, I'd be happy if we could create our character top-to-bottom and have complete control of all their dialogue. But ultimately I don't care as long as the writing is solid. People spoke highly of Origins, so hopefully whenever I get around to that I'll be pleasantly surprised.

3. Sure!

Reading this just makes me more excited for that Ghost of Tsushima game.

@theht: You and me both! I don't care what people (wrongly) think of Second Son, that was a really great launch game and it actually holds up pretty well! I'd love to see what else that studio can come up with and I always love some samurai in my games. Recently for some reason I found some playthrough videos of Shinobi on PS2. Remember Shinobi? With that long ass scarf, that game was tough at the time but it had style.

I do love Greece quite a bit...

So will this be set before or after Kratos goes up north?

@humanity: Hell yeah Shinobi! Loved that flowy scarf and four-eyed visor. Don't remember much of how it played, but definitely remember that styyyyyyle.

Second Son was good! I was turned off by the dialogue at first and uninstalled it before even reaching the first area proper. Gave it another shot recently and once I was gliding around collecting shards I started having a blast. Even managed to get a genuine emotional reaction outta me with the hero ending.

Curious about what a Sucker Punch-made grounded samurai game would feel like, gameplay-wise, considering what the Infamous games are. Guess we'll find out in 10 days!

I'd accept the excuse with Japan if there were in fact ever any (somewhat) grounded games in that setting to make it an actual cliche. The cliche is always inhabiting an Anime or beating up Japanese mythology.

Which there's plenty of room for that but also for an Assassin's Creed take.

I feel the same as a lot of people here, the annual releases are too much and I thought they had learned something with Origin. Granted I haven't played Origin yet, but that's only because I'm still burnt out on the series from like 3 Assassin's Creed's ago.

The create a character is probably also a negative for the series. It works in things like Bioware games because you always have way more interesting characters around you talking. Assassin's Creed is largely a lonely experience.

Ancient Greece is a no brainier for the franchise. Probably half of my enjoyment of these games has been from the historical tourist angle, and that's a setting I never tire of.

Yeah, I kind of gave up on that awhile ago. But hey, least we got Ghost of Tsushima on the way. Which i'm personally way more excited about.

I was doubtful about annual AC when brotherhood was first shown off but that ended up being my favourite in the series, so i'm okay with it being annual, the foundation is solid.

RPG elements? Character customization? Doesnt matter, the story in all of Ubisoft's games, especially AC, has always been shit.

Honestly origins is a pretty big departure gameplay wise from the series I wouldn't compare it to the other games at all really.

Loved Origins so I will absolutely play another one of those.

Disappointed if they are really back to yearly realeases. Hopefully it's just a reveal at this E3 for release next year.

Also, with the way Origins ended I would have hoped to play as Aya if Greece is the setting not some create-a-character.

1. Yearly releases? Blegh. This is too soon. Would prefer a bigger expansion or dlc for Origins, then bring in Odyssey next year

2. Greece is a cool setting - I am intrigued, but will wait for a bit after release.

Ancient Greece is my jam! Can’t wait! Hope it’s good

If it's ancient Greece, wouldn't it be set before Origins? Since Origins is set in Ptolomaic Egypt and the most well known periods of Greece are significantly before.

Loved Origins but I gorged myself on it, and I doubt I'm good for more so soon. Also, Greece strikes me as a kind of glorified expansion pack like some of the earlier AC off year titles.

I think I'll do what I did with the franchise for a long while, which was to promise myself to sit it out and wait for Ancient Egypt to eventually happen. This time, I'll wait to jump back in for feudal Japan, unless Odyssey's reviews are INCREDIBLE.

I always have Syndicate that London one that I never did play that interests me quite a bit if I need some of that old school AC.

Just for posterity these are some of the old quotes I was referring to (when asked about an AC game in Japan):

"In the broad strokes and scale of history, that's a theme that's been well-mined in videogames," Hutchinson told TotalXbox. "So, Assassin's Creed is one of those games that can take [lesser-known] time periods or corners of the world and make them cool, fun, new and refreshing."

Hutchinson added that feudal Japan "would work" for Assassin's Creed but would be too familiar. He points out players have already become ninjas or samurai in plenty of other games.

His statement is in line with an interview he gave back in 2012, when he said Japan would be one of the "worst" settings for an Assassin's Creed game because of how overdone it is.

"People on the internet suggest the most boring settings," Hutchinson said at the time. "The three most wanted are WWII, feudal Japan and Egypt. They're kind of the three worst settings for an AC game."

So considering they changed their tune about Egypt, who knows. I understand where the guy is coming from, but there is something to be said about being niche for the sake of being niche. A good setting is a good setting, which is why a lot of games keep going back to them. I have absolutely no interest in playing another WWII themed shooter ever again in my entire life, but I would love to see what an AC game could do with it. The Saboteur was a neat exploration of that time period from a third person action game perspective.

Odyssey makes me sad because it means we will never get that Founding Family Trilogy that was rumoured. Bayek in Egypt, Amunet in Rome and their child in Judeh.

Yeah I also feel like modern pop culture plays a role in this too. The "games have mined too much out of Egypt or Ancient Japan" argument is all well and fine if it was like two decades ago or something. A big reason the feudal Japan setting I think get so much love is that it was visited in previous console generations but has never really been given it's due in modern ones. I think a big one of those set in that time period would have a Red Dead effect. I mean lets get real, how long has it been since even a proper Ninja Gaiden? The idea that games were mining thsee time periods I feel like is 90's console generations, honestly, maybe even some early Xbox and PS. Tomb Raider must of done Egypt in the old days but I'll be damned if any of it was memorable. I suppose Uncharted did Egypt as well.

I don't know I still think feudal Japan is the best option. If anything with the success of films like Gladiator and even fantasy like LoTR and Thrones I'm less interested in Greece. I know what Medievil combat looks like, hell how different is Greece going to be from Brotherhood and 2? I'm interested to see the Colosseum stuff I guess. I just don't really buy the argument that you need to be niche for niche sake, especially if all you look at is games. What matters is what you do with the environment most of the time anyways.

I have to say, Japan is a setting I would be the least interested in.

I enjoyed Origins a lot, so I'm excited to see a sequel for it. The return to an annual recycle makes me a bit nervous, but it has worked out at some points in the past (Brotherhood was only one year after AC2 but still managed to make significant improvements).

Greece makes sense for a sequel to Origins, but I'm a little concerned it might feel a bit too familiar considering how much Greek architecture was in the last game.

I always really loved samurai and ninjas and the Japan setting, probably because it's so completely different culturally from the rest of the world. Also in my mind it always made sense, the whole thing about ninjas being sneaky spies that worked under cover of darkness. I'm not sure how iconic Greece can be. Egypt in Origins wasn't that striking for me apart from the pyramids. I certainly didn't feel the culture as strongly as Paris in Unity or Rome in the Ezio games. Still I'm a fan of the series and I've played every one so far apart from Syndicate which I didn't see any appeal in, so as always I'm willing to give it a shot. Initially I thought Unity, specifically the setting, looked really boring but when I got around to playing the game it turned out really cool - shame about the performance and bugs but all in all Unity was a solid effort and I kind of wish they just polished up that version instead of what they did in Syndicate and continued in Origins. The combat especially was always very unique to the series and now they've diluted it into a very basic combo style button masher. If you didn't like the countering of the previous games thats absolutely fine, because there are plenty of other third person games out there to choose from. Ironically the more they strip away what made the franchise so different to begin with, the more praise the games seem to get.

@jonny_anonymous: Any reason why? Just not into the Japan setting or is it a time period thing?

@humanity I can't speak for everyone else but I'll say a big reason why Origins and their philosophy of stripping away some of the core mechanics of AC to make a more open world RPG type of experience makes it better for me is because the best thing about every AC game has been the world, not the gameplay. Going through and getting all the feathers and things in the old AC games always felt fine, but left me bummed. This is my excuse to run around the world? Basically an end game mario style collectathon? Lame. I wanted an excuse to do nothing but explore that world. Origins was like, what if we just give you loot, and tons of EXP, and give locations just little themed interactions as an excuse to go to a place? Oh and the 100% exploration/find everything in a location thing. That alone sold it to me. I loved Egypt as a setting, but I also loved Paris. I just wanted reasons to go around the world and have fun living in it. Sure the combat and the story and all that other stuff is there and it can be fine to hit or miss depending on the title/character. But the more Bethesda these games become the more I want them. So that could be a reason why they get better received the more they get stripped down and re-imagined if you will.

@devise22: I get yah but I'm a little different in that I definitely don't want these games to go the Bethesda route. I don't want them to be completely soulless husks with stuff to collect and do. The sidequests in Origins were extremely cookie cutter and after a while it got tiring. The world was huge but so what if it's populated by the same 3-5 activities. It's the reason why I can't get into games like Spelunky or roguelites in general. I vastly prefer a shorter but more bespoke experience rather than something bigger but more general. The past games were cool to me because there was a very focused main plot, with some stuff to do along the way. Origins diluted that stuff for me a little too much.

I hope the new Murder-Man wears Cappy.

So when will we get any word on a Symposium dlc?

Has the time period been announced yet? If you're going to set something in Greece, it would probably be roughly somewhere between 450BCE and 350BCE otherwise you get into Macedonian stuff and it's harder to centralize the interesting politics and figures into a nicely video game-sized area. For my money, post Peloponnesian War would be the most interesting period. If that's the case, it's weird that they keep pushing the timeline back before Assassins were really a thing, but if they move away from the magic relics and templars and just made a political thiller action game, I'd be all for it.

I just hope it's not Sparta focused like the trailer slightly implies, I'm sick of the usual Spartan idealization that goes on.

I hope Vangelis does the OST.

Greece sounds like a great setting to me. Not sure how ready I'll be for another AC when it comes out though, I've only just barely started inching my way through Origins.

Not sure it's gonna be an actual sequel. Bayak and Aya aren't in it and it's a separate team making it.

@jonny_anonymous: Here is Bayek's voice actor making a joke about Odyssey which makes me think that he is involved in some capacity. In Origins, they didn't even get to the part where Aya kills Cleopatra. I don't think we've seen the last of them.

@cerberus3dog: That part is actually being told in the current Assassins Creed comic. Judging from all we know from Odyssey it either takes place 300 years before Origins or 150 years after it.