Okay, this is the game.

Remember when we all asked for Assassin's Creed to become a soulslike... I don't... but it's here... Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.................

"Soulslike" is this generations "CoD RPG elements".

What are you talking about? You can't die from fall damage. Sounds like a Souls-UN-like to me! Nyuck nyuck nyuck.

Seriously though, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Despite being a Souls veteran, I don't really see too many meaningful similarities. I am hoping it's good though.

Combat. Not even difficulty. Simply the feel of the combat. It's lightyears from what I remember playing in the first Assassin's Creed and, personally, I don't think for the best. The original Creed's combat, especially in II and its additions, was simple but had the potential for interesting experimentation; and, if expanded upon would, I think, with some creativity and imagination, have made this combat feel way more solid. It doesn't feel like you're connecting. And on the higher difficulty levels, the enemies are sponges. It's like that episode of Spongebob when Spongebob is being punched and nothing's happening. It's a major trope in games, but I'm beginning to notice developers do it more and more often, I think, merely to make the consumer and player feel like they're getting more for their dollar. And I really don't mind a challenge, I enjoy one, but I know when I'm being played and taken advantage of, and enemies that are sponges are just that kind of aspect; a deceptive one: e.g., see how Bungie made the enemies in their games take more damage and the player less to make the player feel like the enemy A.I. was "smarter."

@stonyman65: Yep, and it sucks if you don't really like Dark Souls.

In fairness, though, this is the first Assassin's Creed game in years that has my attention. I'll probably buy it at some point.

@wixedwon: no. and noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. I hate souls games. Probably wont pick this up based off that and other comments I've heard about AC Odyssey.

I like Souls combat but I dont think it works well in Origins, havent played Odyssey. That being said AC used to use Batman style counter heavy combat which wasnt great either.

@boozak: I always hated AC combat in the old games. I haven't played Origins, but I'm not a fan of the combat in Dark Souls either.

Everyone seems to hold the Batman combat system up as the great standard, but I find the button-mashy nature of it very boring.

If I had to choose, I'd take Dark Souls' combat.

I can see how some might see the old AC combat as button-mashy, but with all the experience I've had with those games, I would say it's far more rhythmic and pattern based. Yes, a cursory playthrough may certainly feel button-mashy, and I will admit, when I first played the OG AC, it was exactly that, but as I observed the gameplay mechanics and the properties of the input system, I noticed and grew accustomed to the the rhythm and flow of the old AC games. While I chewed through the fat that was the combat in Origins, I am perturbed by how spongey and unresponsive Odyssey still feels at higher difficulties; I noticed this problem in Origins too. Since Origins and the retcon, the games combat mechanics simply feel entirely new and unlike their predecessors'; and, really do seem to be playing on the popularity of the combat in Dark Souls without giving it the proper respect it deserves in regards to the balancing.

Also, enjoy spending money on a game that is built to get you to pay for content that should have been included in the game, in the first place through micro-transactions. yay.... permanent 50% xp, "drachME", and whatever else they want to use to try and cleanout your wallet. Wait till it feels grindy, almost by design, and then when you get that little hint when you die and are sent to the wonderful loading screen (which if you're encompassed by mercenaries as often as I am, may happen quite a bit - for Classical Age mercenaries, you would think they have a gps tracker implanted in your skull to find you) buy a permanent XP boost! It's not like the game designers recognized how monotonous and frankly boring it became. And, like any good reader of Sun Tzu would note, one must capitalize on their weaknesses, and thus, Ubisoft is smart for adding XP, Gold, and other glorious boosts by microtransactions that blatantly counteract the game's grind, seemingly by intent.

Have they changed the combat much from Origins? I don't consider Origins to have souls-like combat (speaking as someone who doesn't like Souls games but enjoyed Origins).

@gooddoggy: Not drastically, there's a few differences such as giving you active skills you unlock in the abilities tree that can then be utlised and the removal of shields but its by and large the same. I would also agree that calling either Origins or Odysssey's combat souls-like is a bit of a reach never felt all that similar to me beyond some very basic similarities that are also shared by a million other games.

@gooddoggy: I’m with you in that I don’t like Souls games and kinda dug the combat in Origins. It was actiony, sure, but not as difficult as a Souls game to manage.

I think the definition of "souls-like" is being applied a little too generally here.

I have played most DS games and bloodborne and don't get that feel from the combat at all. MAYBE bloodborne exccept it is way more action oriented.

If by "souls-like" means, "you attack and have a dodge button" then sure. By that definition God of War, the Witcher are "souls-like". IMO you don't use the souls terms to describe the combat itself, its more the mechanics around the combat and the game as a whole.

To me the difference between a Souls Like and like just a normal action game we've had for ages is the deliberate feel and Origins doesn't really have that it is extremely loose and forgiving.

It can't just be like...the button placements.

Older AC combat was waaay too forgiving to the point where I would just use wrist blades and parry everything, almost felt like a rhythm game. I enjoyed the combat in Origins, sounds like Odyssey has improved on that formula, if what you're saying holds up and it's got some Souls combat thrown in there too I'm all in.

@the_last_starfighter: Insta-killing the final boss in AC1 just by counter with the wrist blades was the best!

@gooddoggy: People just decided to call it Souls like because you used the shoulder buttons to fight and there is a shield involved. I'd say its a hell of a stretch. I'm playing Odyssey with Alternate controls so attacking is all on the face buttons so it pretty much feels like every game with a light and heavy attack.

@merxworx01: Eh, to deny it has some Souls like inspirations would be pretty blind. Your right, it's mostly just in the control scheme from a mechanical perspective. But governing rules and structure of the combat system is also totally inspired. Different weapon types being different animations with strenghts/weaknesses based on range, speed etc. Old AC started leaning in that direction, but as they were still leaning more Batman inspired with the combat the lock on was a lot more generous.

It's also just the approach to enemies. A lot more bosses and higher tier enemies in the newer games. I'm not saying it's the only thing it takes inspiration from obviously, I think right now we are in this weird phase with open world games where every new big grand one that is trying to do a thing has been paying attention to every standardized quality of life, and little thing to come up with a very iterative example of their take on the genre. Whichever franchise you want to look at, the actually IP of it in most cases has started to resemble a skin that you put over the open world. Most of the actually discovery for the player winds up digging to find the areas of the game that are different, mixed with the skin. It's odd. But it's also kind of fascinating.

In this way I think it's silly to not just admit that a game like Origins and Odyssey wear the inspirations pretty clearly. While it's really on in the approach to combat encounters, and some of what governs that, it's still got Souls DNA in it for sure.

@merxworx01 there is no shield in Odyssey.

@wixedwon: I'm refering to Origin.

@devise22: Can you elaborate regarding the governing rules and structure? Seems they scraped the contextual crowd combat of older games with lock-on direct control fighting. I hardly consider that Souls inspired. They've had different weapons that dictated how you fought in games since the 2nd Assassins Creed, suddenly making it direct control with targeting makes it sounds like any third person melee action game made after Ocarina of Time.

"It's also just the approach to enemies. A lot more bosses and higher tier enemies in the newer games."

So it now has RPG elements and levels. Sorry still sounds like a reach.

@merxworx01: It really comes down to a feel thing. As someone who plays a lot of the Souls/Borne games, there was an aspect to old AC that felt way more like Batman. Yes it had different weapons, but it was just for animation badassery. With the exception of a couple of long weapons, each type wasn't really distinct in terms of the varied types of attack chains you could do.

While AC also used to have a parry system, having it governed around crowd control and combat being a mix of you hitting the same button for counters/the odd other movie meant it was more about timing. It was like a rhythm game almost. Again, more akin to something like Batman. There is a "flow" that you realize provided you can see the enemy coming your able to get through larger groups of enemies without ever being hit.

With both Origins and Odyssey that structure isn't there at all. The dodge is less about quickly getting out of danger and more about leveraging it to get behind opponents and strategies based on enemies having a series of different animation based attacks. Souls isn't the first game to do that stuff, but it highly popularized it, and presented in a way that is very similar to AC. The path of combat once you go loud and wish to engage in hand to hand becomes take your weapon of choice, considering your range/animation options, as some weapons attack slower than others, and then consider your opposition. Some people are weak to certain things etc, having to do different types of attacks to shield opponents.

Timing is still obviously important in these encounters, but it's less about timing counters to make yourself look cool and far more about actually battling your way through the pace of a combat scenario the hard way, calculating your attack decisions and varying the paced based on circumstance. They still kept all the cool animation stuff too, they just loaded it all on the back end as they give it to the weapons for unique kill/finishing animations.

In regards to the boss structure it was more in regards to them creating unique enemy types with unique weapons/animations that change the dynamic of combat. Again like I think people hear Souls like and somehow think that everything about the game has to be inspired by it, or alternatively, that it means Soul was the first to do something like that. In some cases it was being iterative, I'd argue there are aspects of the Souls games themselves that you can trace back to OoT. It's not stating that something wasn't also inspired by other things deeper down the gaming lore. More so that things of this nature a longer curve. If old AC combat very much wore it's Batman influence on it's sleeve, the switch in Origins was a noticeable change to something more akin to an experience you'd see in general Souls combat encounters.

Damn it.

@devise22: you hit it spot on. congrats.

A number for the things you are mentioning in regards to enemies are things that were always in previous games, enemies that are aware of you are still operate as they would in previous games. Enemies the carry shields or fight in a manner that requires getting behind an enemy? Fighting enemies with tower shields or brutes that rebuffed direct combat are common in every AC after the first one. Because of that weapons were not simply the same weapon with different animation. A cane did not have the same effect as a kukri, a axe did not operate the same way as a cutlass. They determined if you stunned, knocked down or parried an enemy, if they broke through shielded or non shielded defense or if they affected armored enemies at all. Again these thing have been in previous AC games. The difference is now the game uses direct controls, which is how most games are played. I would never say that dodging or "single button=single action" combat needed to be popularized by Souls games seeing as how rudimentary those actions are.

If we just decide that call anything with this type of combat a Souls like then we can add Final Fantasy XV and Witcher 2-3 as Souls inspired games.

Also the AC games had the crowd control combat before Arkham was released so if anything AC influenced Arkham.

Have you played Origins? Because the combat you describe has been in place since that game. Origins also introduced the unique, harder enemies roaming around the open world...

Also, I wouldn't call it Souls-like, although the buttons configuration is closer to them than to previous AC games. If anything, the combat seems to take some inspirations from For Honor (defending mechanics aside), another popular Ubisoft property.

People really love throwing that word around huh...

If it hasn't taken notes from the Souls games, I would be astonished. They've gone so far as to include an ability in the game that is basically an infinite use Estus flask, as long as you have stamina. I'm not throwing the word around, I get people do, but the influence is apparent.

I mean, Souls combat is basically an evolution of Ocarina of Time's combat. I hate to be snooty like that, but after playing Origin's a bit, it has more in common with OoT than it does DS.

Edit: Didn't realize an above user already mentioned this. But yeah.

I think it obviously takes notes and influence but what it learned was the motions and not necessarily making any attempt at all at replicating how those motions feel in an actual Souls game.

I think the Combat is fine, a little perfunctory, but solid enough. Personally I miss the empowerment of AC2 Brotherhood, being the 'Human Cuisinart' or better yet, pressing a button to bring down a hail of arrow murdering all before you.

Souls like? I think Witcher like would be more accurate.

I love the Souls games and the combat is fun to me. Origins felt similar since you can lock onto enemies and maybe button configuration was similar, but it was extremely simple and after a short while becomes kind of repetitive since it doesn't really challenge so the most fun (and funniest times) I had was just obliterating an entire area early on, seeing a multitude of enemies just come at me and Bayek murdering them like it isn't anything. I'm hoping Odyssey does a little more, and I've heard it has. The game doesn't feel like a Souls game despite its similarities. And 'Souls-like' to me is about the way a game goes about its difficulty and its RPG systems, not necessarily its combat.

Weapons that play differently isn't really a Souls thing. Nor is a shield and a dodge, nor is having buttons on the shoulders. Nor are enemies that are literally scaled beyond your ability top kill them, nor is a fully open world. In Souls, you can be leveled to high hell and be careless and die very quickly. Not quite the same in Origins and Odyssey.

@the_nubster what would define soulslike for you?

@wixedwon: Deeply interconnected level design, extremely deliberate combat, a corpse-run mechanic, hard RPG elements (ie stats) and some level of extremely intentional obtuseness about its mechanics/lore. For example, I'd put Hollow Knight as closer to being a Soulslike than these recent AC games.

I can overlook so much about the bloat and design shortcomings of AC:Odyssey, but the combat is simply not fun. For a game that places so little emphasis in, well, everything; from the gravity of its story, to the direction of the player amongst a sea of icons and timed quests, the simplest combat encounters are life or death.

There is so really no satisfaction in the combat. Really, none. At best, it ends.

I was debating playing Bloodborne, for the first time, instead of AC before Red Dead. At least then I could have enjoyed a more thoughtful style of souls combat with Halloween approaching. Now I just get to fetch something for Perikles.

This game seems real dope! I was a little skeptical of moving on to the next game so soon after Origins but I'm a fan of pretty much all of the changes so far. It's a little weird that they adopted level-scaling without an option to turn it off, though, as far as I can tell; I was a big fan of the "do the missions a couple levels below you and just murder everyone" tactic in Origins, but so far I haven't had any real trouble with any of the missions, so I guess it's all working out. Looking forward to putting some more time into this.

@rorie: It's a pretty reasonable form of level scaling at least. It stays behind you by about 2 or 3 levels so that means once you have thoroughly outleveled a zone you pretty much can carve through whatever you want there provided you have up to date gear.

@the_nubster: I really do think it's just the commitment to basic combat is where the comparison is. Especially as a shift in comparison to old AC. I know old AC had levels of some of the systems we see here. But the approach to combat, specifically I think the tension highs/lows you feel as a player often more closely resembles something like a Dark Souls. Not that it was the first to do this mind you. Just as a comparison, I'd say when you lock on to a target and get into melee combat even if there is a crowd, the timing and how you are paying attention to things has a flow that resembles that. I don't think there are that many other comparisons maybe that some of the larger boss battles are as elaborate as you'd see in Souls, but they do that sparingly, it almost seems like it's their version of raid boss, a bigger souls-eqsue boss.

But that feel thing is pretty pivotal tbh. Unless your doing a lot of archery, or stealth, if you choose to be a heavy melee get in there fuck shit up character it can feel at times like playing a less challenging version of a Souls.

@rorie:I'm playing on hard and the only times i felt under-leveled was because of the mercenaries early on. There are a few occasions where an NPC will do a power move and kill me in one hit, but the saving is usually forgiving enough that I don't lose a ton of progress. Mercenaries are a big enough threat that when I hear that horn I immediately hide until I spot them. The game likes to have them pop up when I am in a fort or something being stealthy, and I have so far really enjoyed that. I have screwed myself a bit because I found one set of gear that I like the look of, and keep upgrading them instead of wearing the new stuff, so I am sometimes under-geared going into a mission, but if all else fails, I maneuver them to a cliff or roof and spartan kick them into history.

Love this game!

@lokihellfire2008: Yeah, the mercs are fun. It's interesting as this is really the first game that I've seen that's borrowed a lot from the Nemesis System from Shadow of Mordor, but in a fairly simple way as opposed to the super-complicated Shadow of War stuff they implemented. Thus far I haven't found any mercs that were super terrible, but maybe I've just been lucky so far in that I've been near buildings when the mercs have popped up. The climbing AI seems a bit more restricted than in previous games and so far I haven't had any problems finding buildings that they can't follow me onto, at which point everything just comes down to waiting and jump-killing them. But that's fun, so no complaints so far.

The bounty system can become a real hassle if things rapidly go south because that gauge can rise super quick and when you draw the attention of 3+ tier mercs at low level you can be in some real trouble.

It gets especially annoying with a mechanic that makes random civilians grab whatevers nearby to fight you and harming them is an especially rough hit to the wanted gauge.

@efesell: oh yeah. enjoy getting into an encounter with chickens, defending yourself, having the bounty go up, go on a mission, get caught by said hunter, die, go through the abysmal loading screen, and start the mission again. Hurray! fun...

I don't know that I was ever KILLED by a merc ambush because they're pretty stupid and just paying off the bounty in a pinch was always an option with all the damn money I had.

But civilians taking up arms is incredibly annoying when you DO have to fight a big battle near them.

@efesell, it's not hard to kill the mercs necessarily, true, but when you're dealing with chickens, and as you say, citizens as well, and then your bounty keeps going up, and every time you kill a merc more civilians attack, pushing your bounty up even more, and then suddenly more mercs come... oh, oh it is frustrating.

@rorie: I'm not sure if this is supposed to happen or not, but once I was in a cut scene with a lover, and after I walked out of the house we were in, a mercenary walked out behind me and started attacking. Pretty funny. I imagine that while the cut scene is going on, the mercenary AI is still looking for your character and moving around in the world. I've also noticed that some of the AI will use healing potions or something. Not sure if this is just on hard though.