Here's How Assassin's Creed Valhalla Handles Microtransactions

F**K Ubisoft.

Not for me. Spending a lot of money just for some outfits and weapons is non sense.

It was the payment for an XP boost to make Odyssey's grind bearable that was the annoyance. Is that making a reappearance?

@Barryburton97 It probably will return, but I think its existence was incredibly overstated in the first place.

As long as there are lots of cool looking armour and weapons to find in the game then I'll be happy to ignore this

@LiamCroft it was totally possible to avoid it, agreed. But the fact they knew their game was too long and decided to charge extra to relieve the grind was sheer cheek.
It should've just been built into the Easy difficulty setting or something.

@Barryburton97 Yeah, it probably could have been implemented better.

Odyssey's microtransactions still irritated me. It was also clear they existed, and whenever I had to do 10 mins of BS to find the materials to upgrade a sword, it didn't feel like part of the gameplay, it felt like a tax for not paying microtransactions.

Get ready for another tedious grindfest.
I await the day all of Ubisoft's franchises seep into each other to create some sort of hideous blob monster which devours us all.

Obviously I’ll never buy cosmetic packs in games. Especially full price games (I might be tempted to get a bikini pack on a cheap JRPGs if on sale, maybe). I don’t care how well hidden or otherwise the store is really. Although I don’t really like in game NPCs trying to sell you equipment for which you need an expansion or forcing you to the ps store.

Why do people keep buying their games? They're average at best and set an awful precedent for the industry with dirty monetisation practices. Not to mention all the abuse issues from the management and people in power.

After playing ghost of tsushima it's kind of hard playing ac odyssey again, I think I'm gonna pass this one. Ubisoft needs to up their game, gameplay and story wise.

Everything that costs real money is just time saving or cosmetic, don’t know why people hate that, entirely optional, and at no point does an npc try to sell you anything off of it, you can even get all the cosmetic stuff in game, sure, it’s random from loot boxes but it doesn’t cost real money, plus I had no issues with xp so had zero need for an xp boost. So all the hate Ubisoft gets for this is rather unwarranted but oh well...

Absolutely bonkers, but it's Ubisoft so I'm not surprised -.-
I remember getting Odyssey and I literally sold the game just because the grind was unbearable and they even had the audacity to promote the XP booster that cost 10 dollars! At least EA's games are fun and stick with the "just cosmetic" excuse.
P*ss off Ubisoft!

@Old-Red I entirely agree. And it's why I'm deeply conflicted about buying Ubisoft games. But hey, if I truly put my money where my mouth is, I wouldn't own anything. Personally, I have a soft spot for Assassin's Creed due to nostalgia for the earlier games in the series. The newer games are less than stellar, but they're still enjoyable time wasters. I want to be more optimistic about the industry, but I'm honestly really worried about next-gen as a whole.

I'll buy the cosmetics pack if it gives Eivor luscious pouty lips, flirty lashes and a flustered blush.

I hate that drachma and xp boosters sh*t..... in Odyssey.....

@pyrobolt

I agree, but what better opportunity for the haters to express their opinions!

Seriously, I played odyssey over 400 hours and not once felt “pressure” to buy from the store. And aren’t these the kind of micro transactions that gamers always say that they want in games? Those that are purely cosmetic and have nothing to do with gameplay or pay to win strategies? I just don’t get it either - the hate, that is.

What they do is take the best looking stuff and cut it from the game to sell back to you...so ya cosmetics kinda matter :/

The easiest way for this to end is for people to stop spending more money on MTX.I have played through these games and never been tempted or felt the need to spend more on stuff when I have plenty of options from just playing the game and earning lots of loot...

The more that people keep spending, the more developers and especially publishers will put these things into the games. If nobody buys, then these will disappear - its voting with your wallet.

Of course, boycotting the game itself is a 'vote' too, but that only tells them you are not interested in that game and you are opting to miss out on the experience and fun it provides over what is essentially an 'optional' thing. If you buy the game, but don't spend any money on MTX, that gives them the information on percentages of people who won't spend money. If the vast majority of gamers are boycotting MTX, then it shows that people are not interested. If they actually asked those who refused to buy the game 'why?', then it would help too but they don't...

I will get this game on Day 1 but will NOT spend any extra money on MTX. There is nothing that I can't get in game that does the 'same' kind of thing and I am happy with just using in-game loot throughout!

@BAMozzy The sad reality of it is. The people against microtransactions within the industry, considering all facets of it, including consumers, are a minority. The majority of gamers are perfectly content spending potentially hundreds of dollars on a single game, which is why FTP, sports games, and stuff like CoD are as popular as they are. They consist of a lot of people's entire game library, essentially. And game companies make millions off of microtransactions alone. Those of us who keep up with the industry are inside a bubble, most of us know what's going on, and most of us are against it. That statement doesn't ring true for the majority of consumers, and that's what companies like Take-two, Bethesda, EA, Ubisoft, and unfortunately, now CDPR, are banking off of.

I enjoy fitting my characters with different outfits so I will definitely be checking out the cosmetic packs and probably buy some of the ones I like.

It’s already $80 CAD ($133 for Deluxe, $160 Ultimate) and then I see crap like this still go on to pad Ubisofts fiscal reports...am I supposed to just say “oh well it’s optional so it must be ok”

I mean is the asking price really not enough for Ubisoft? There’s a reason I never pickup their titles at launch as they always seem to miraculously go on sale by Christmas anyways. It’s sad that people today, even from reading others comments here have been slowly conditioned to think currencies & in-game stores (that req. actual cash) are normal or even defend stuff like this

I put 150+ hours into AC:O and never felt the need to spend money. The grind was no more than 100 other RPG's.

@Old-Red I stopped buying their games since Far Cry 5 and I haven't even bought much before FC5. I thought FC5 would be good but it was such boring chore.

As someone playing through Origins now, I have never felt the need to pay for a single item from their store. I almost always clear all the missions and stuff as I work through an Ubisoft map, so I am never under powered and it doesn't feel grindy at all. I actually kind of dig it.

If this is how they handle microtransactions, I'm totally fine with it. Let the whales pay for continued support for my game. I'm fine with that.

@lcipri I just don't understand it, especially when most of the outfits are above and beyond immersion breaking. I can understand it for online multiplayer match based games, of course, but single player story games? Does not compute.

I am the kind of player that doesn't ever change the outfit of my character throughout play, free or paid. Most of this is because I enjoy the original outfit the best; but also because it's often immersion breaking.

So paying money for the privilege? As you said, nonsense.

@MFTWrecks Agreed. I bought an armor/boat set in Odyssey because I thought it looked cool and I loved the game. If Ubisoft takes away the ability for those of us who want to spend more money on their games it will only hurt those who don't want to.

@SpicyTacos101 If you are asking the question: "Is X amount of money not enough for Y company" then the answer will always and unequivocally be: No, it's not.

That being said, there are other ways to get a larger return on investment; for example: player good will and word of mouth can often translate into more sales over a longer period of time, and potentially transfer into future projects (CDPR is a good example of this); but the quick and easy way is microtransactions.

Not long ago we were upset that they were trying to sell us stuff on "day one," which suggested they had already made the items but were charging extra for them rather than include them in the game. Now we're glad they hide this in a menu? I really do think if this stuff was called out rather than excused we'd see it less often - it's happened many times before, like with the ads in UFC.

@thefourfoldroot lol the only thing that make you buy skins is your horniness

Like saying I can't stop eating Chocolate because the Supermarket has it next to check out.

Don't click on the "store" button. Problem solved.

I never bought anything on AC: Odyssey (was swimming in gear). In Origin,, I did the Isu Armor quest and called it a day.

@PeterN80

Except that walls to progression have existed in RPGs since their inception. That is a not a new thing. That’s part of what an RPG has contained historically. Odyssey gave you an option to bypass that wall. It wasn’t “required”. There are plenty of other ways within the game to level up your character to move on to the next section. I’m not on board with this revisionist history that thinks RPG‘s have never had level gating!

They intentionally make ingame cosmetics look like ***** so they can force us to spend $$$ on good looking ones.

I mean, RPGs have had level grinding since the 80s. I just spent 10 hours grinding job levels in Final Fantasy V. If someone had offered to skip those 10 hours for £5 I’d have said no as I enjoy grinding but others might. If you don’t want the MTX, don’t buy them. That’s much more of a vote against the practice than not buying the game. If the game doesn’t sell well but everyone buying the game is paying for MTX then they’ll continue with those practices.

@HammerKirby3
Lol, I wouldn’t say cartoons go that far, but if I’m staring for hours anyway then why not make things a little more aesthetically pleasing? Lol

Why are these still called microtransaction? $20 is clearly NOT micro, it's a normal transaction that costs as much lunch in a restaurant, or as much as many full price indie games.

They should add the platinum trophy for locked behind a $50 transaction. I'm sure they'd make a lot with this.

@Barryburton97 I dont like a game where i have the option too make me play it less it sounds so weird. Here a XP boost so you can go through the game faster.

@nessisonett I think its stupid in any form. And the dont buy nonsense it doesnt hold up. If you would like too pay too skip gameplay then its just terrible game design. And you want too reward a company with cash for that. 😆

@Rhaoulos Look at COD MW they let you pay up too €20 plus with halve the garbage in a pack which you dont want. 😢

Quality will die for greed in the end

I mean you say hidden but Odyssey was grindy as hell to encourage paying for upgrades. Good game but you know why it was sooooo huge.

@Flaming_Kaiser Think about it, if they look at the percentage of users buying MTX then if the only people buying the game are the ones willing to spend on cosmetics, of course they’ll see it as a positive. If only 5% of users bought into the MTX, they might see that as more of a vote against MTX.

@Absymbel I missed the L in the last word there, wow that tickled me!!

@kyleforrester87 well, I sure hope nobody goes "I hate MTX" online and then buys them when they get home, but with these juggernaut games the horizon must be broadened way past these fansites we visit, to include all the "casuals" who pick up FIFA, COD and AC.
Do you think any of them wonders how and why boosters and cosmetics are in there, to purchase with real money? No, for two simple reasons:

1) the average, uninterested consumer, unlike us enthusiasts, doesn't ponder on the ontology of the game: I bought the game, game works like this, the end.
We are informed enough to analyze the mechanics, how they interact, every single moving part and how it's contextualized in the game as a whole. Uninformed/uninterested people consume media at face value, without considering why things are the way they are;

2) even if they did, they're so used to MTX everywhere in the last 10 years, that they probably think "well, that's how games work nowadays": like I said before, if you're not informed enough you don't have the context to judge things against.

@NorrinRadd @pyrobolt And the above is why MTX are bad.
"They're optional" is a tired, moot point, because:

1) just like every other aspect of the design, they go on to affect the rest of the game, like a domino;

2) Unsuspecting, uninformed buyers don't have the tools to understand them and why they're there in the first place;

3) the most obvious: it's a full price game that gives you the possibility of paying in order not to play. I don't think I have to explain why that is messed up, I hope.

How have we come to the point where making a humongous, copypasted, grindy game with XP boosters is more profitable than a tailor-made, average-length experience?
I mean, the budget for these games must be astronomical, for how big they are, even though copy and pasting certainly takes away a lot of work.

@NorrinRadd I mean I didn't spend as long as you in Odyssey but I agree. I levelled up naturally so never fell there was any pay wall behind finishing the game. I think these type of transactions are OK for those who don't have so much free time and want to splash a bit of cash to enjoy the game at a faster pace.

I think those who want to spend less time in the game and finish in under 30 hours are probably going to have problems with this though.

@clvr I dunno I see what you're saying with point 3 but I always saw it as allowing people to not play particular portions of the game so they could focus on the story. As you say its bad for enthusiasts but the casual gamer can lap it up.

I personally miss the days where everything was unlocked ingame or paid DLC (large scale).

Definitely not supporting AC if it has MTX, though Valhalla does look like a pretty good offering. All that fuss about Ubi changing was just more PR stunts

@Alpha_Pulse I get what you're saying, but that's something that can be achieved in way less predatory ways, such as a "Story" difficulty option that many games already offer.

Paying extra just to skip to the end of the game is literally the antithesis of good game design, just the thought of it is appalling.

@clvr yeah to be fair that's a good point.

@nessisonett As long as people dont revolt against it they see it as extra cash. I dont want too act like a *** but you think way too good about gamecompanies. The staff is not treated as part of the company when its about cash its about the investors.