Duckers_McQuack

Update after 49 more hours: well, definitely not worth the grand total of 70 bucks. We're literally playing a beta release of the game, or early access if you will, as the game will release a dlc or 3, which means, "no, content is not done, but we'll sell it for more than 70 bucks at the end of the day". Playable, but so damn flawed, and so much lack of polish!I need my entire family tree's worth of fingers to count all the bugs, misplaced animations, outright bad animations, bad animation timings, characters just making whacky body movements when going from one animation sequence to the next, characters either floating upwards, or clipping under the floor where there is no floor. Just severe lack of post development fine tune and **** todd saying the game has been optimized, i guess he's never played the game ever himself, just watched gameplay for a few sec and say "yes, it's done" lol. As always, severe lack of any care for their games at bethesda needing mods up, down, left and right to fix what bethesda game studios are too lazy to do themselves. As well as using the same dead horse game engine they slap with a stick, just a prettier stick every generation, but still the same dead broken horse. Just this time, they broke the legs further, hence the worse optimization on top of the rest of the mess .__________________ First few hour impressions:At time of release, no. I can not recommend this game. Because there's absolutely zero optimization efforts done.I have a 3090, and if i max it out in 1440p ultrawide with no dynamic res, i get 24.. ****.. fps in new atlantis. That's not acceptable. So untiil at least that has been addressed, i shall leave my review as is. this is a "next gen" game, yet looks like a ps4 game. No ray tracing, no FOV slider, no texture quality slider, no nothing fancy. But then again, it's gamebryo engine. So can't expect it to be remotely next gen.Stealth, the game has none. You can sneak behind someone, 5 meters and they can smell you and they turn aroundUnparalleled exploration freedom? There's no "freedom" for exploration for world travel. Everything is a loading screen, and every space area is literally just a skybox with 2d planet images and 3d **** least they could have done like space engineers and dyson sphere program where planets are physical.Apart from that, and having to drop graphics to medium/low and resolution scale to 70% with DLSS mod to keep my frames high, and visuals decent enough to get just about 60 fps in new atlantis, the game's gameplay and story intrigues me so far.

They aren't even trying anymore.. Game looks like a ps3 game with somewhat ps4 textures with ray tracing. Girl voice actor 2 isn't even trying, animations are poor and rushed, plane in the intro sequence has no realizm/physics at all, just a bumpercar in the air, story is so far boring and cliche, gameplay is boring and not even enjoyable, and controls are annoying.

Performance: Valhalla takes the combat of assassins creed odyssey to the next level, visuals has been upgraded, and the AVX instructions needed in odyssey for the immense amount of code and worldly liveliness the game had which ate up any cpu of the time, has been transferred to the gpu, which means you need a pretty hefty gpu for good performance. I could for instance not play in 1440p on lowest without dipping below 60 fps. Now i have a 3090, and i can finally not only have memory enough to not play on lowest, but also performance needed to be anywhere with at least 60 fps. Combat: The combat however doesn't entirely feel right. It has too much emphasis on open and large combats. Assassins Creed franchise is more about subtly assassinations in the shadows, but this game opens up to full raids. which is what occurred during the Viking raids. Theme of the game: The game also isn't about an assassin, but Eivor, a Viking that meets an assassin and shares a common cause, so they work together, and Eivor does an assassin's work. Theme of the story: The game is quite based around drama, and for me at least, i have not been able to come more than 50% story wise. But that doesn't mean it's bad by any means. Just less appealing for us who doesn't like over the top drama The gear: This is the part that truly burned me out on open world games for a good while. There's way too much artificial inflation of how long it takes to gear properly up, with several micro materials needed to upgrade a gear piece at least once. So i cheated my way to get "infinite" resources to max out every gear. So overall, i either think Ubisoft needs to make a choice and either have Assassins Creed split it's game up to 2 parts. One which focuses on assassins, and a second franchise that takes over where Valhalla started. Be a history telling game. And perhaps have the split series still relevant to each other, where you play as whoever future character will be involved and collaborating with the assassins, and the main franchise that focuses on the proper descendants of the ISU, Eivor might have been a reincarnation, but focus more of the assassins creed itself with direct descendants of the ISU for the main characters to delve much deeper into the history/prophecy of the ISU. So overall score is not good, but not bad either. It has great entertainment value, but falls short of it's premise, combat to some extent, the way too much microgrid and replayability.

Great game series! But ubisoft cheaped out on the game cart and only had one game on a 8GB game cart and rest as digital, almost eliminating the reason to get the game on cart if most of the games will be digital anyways.

Story seems intriguing, gameplay is great, but that paywall **** with rifts and even just gemming your weapons just killed that game off the bat.

I mean, it's a cod game. Plays just like the last game, acts the same, still no dedicated servers, just as **** new engine which means new problems with crashes, invisible players and other **** that follows games in new engines.

Sure, it looks great with the chibi remake of the game! but say you want the legendary mew and jirachi? Nope, pay up 140 bucks for lets go whatever or sword/shield ****

It gets a 1 because the graphics, but the balancing in this game is just ass. It pairs you with much better players than players on your level, So skillbased matchmaking has ruined cod forever for me. It's just not fun. Bring it back to mw2/black ops 1/2 era.. Fun is just non existent in this game.

It gets a weak 2 for me because just like on pc, it has 10.000 UI updates per second. A highly unnecessary draw calls from the poor switch port with poor fps. I use a mod that greatly reduces the amount of unnecessary updates per second on pc, and basically doubled my fps from 27 to 48 fps on 5900x, and this is a necessity for the outdated and weak quadcore of the switch.

Most backward penguin wobbly **** i've ever played. **** punkbuster that kicks you for not cheating, can't be a win/lose ratio as it "balances" mid match. So win/loose ratio is irelevant

The game is great! But the issue is that we were promised all future updates for free. The game has not gotten a single new song pack in almost 2 years.

Launch review: ______________ The game looks decent, performs good when it works with 140 fps in 1440p, but has too much connectivity and stability issues and was practically broken on launch. It freezes after each match for minutes, and pops back in a black screen and my mouse locked to the middle of the screen and when i try to move it, it snaps back to the middle after i get a "lost conenction to server" A new issue: Singleplayer suddenly got horrible graphical glitches that was all color triangles of that area with no way to be playable at all. So It's truly the worst cod launch. August 2020 review: __________________ The game no longer runs properly. Any changes to display settings will cause a directX error and CTD. And framerate went from 120 medium/high at launch to 70 that feels like 40 on lowest in 1440p.

I am gonna have to give this game a weak 3 because it's basically division 1 copy paste except they switched out an infectious disease with thugs. rest of the game's "progression" is the exact same. I got the game at it's 3 euro sale, and i didn't expect change at all, and i was right. I guess it's a decent time killer, but way too repetitive.

Good performing game, but the game reloading the entire session because someone leaves? And pairing me with people with dialup internet with 10k Ms? Brings down the rating hard for me..

It's good, but really damn outdated on switch by soon a year. And they seem to not care about the switch version, just getting base game out and that's it.

As usual cod games doesn't run properly at all or just crashes. This one a damn lot. Crashes 90% of the time.

Can we have the game version the actual critics has? they apparently has a way more stable version of the game than we gamers gets. And no. This is one of the worst cod games by far.

The game is just a performance mess on day one. I got 8700k and RTX 2080, and i drop below 60 fos no matter the graphic settings due to the game apparently only runs on 2 cpu cores where i can't get the game to use more than max 40% cpu or 30-35% average with gpu usage at 50-60%, 40% when the fps tanks during combat at 55 fps. So no, this game at launch is just a broken mess.

For the time being, i can't recommend this game for the switch. Reasons being even a week after release and apparently having a day one patch delayed but arrived, it still suffers from : 1: framerate issues tanking whenever there's action 2: joycons and especially pro controller suffers heavy input delay making it really hard to aim 3: no motion controller support to make aiming actually good and accurate.