Since the launch of Assassin's Creed Valhalla in November last year, Ubisoft has been adding new microtransactions to the in-game store every other week. Previous Assassin's Creed titles followed the same pattern, but there are elements of Valhalla's system that players are beginning to question, and once you understand why, it's not a good look.
In the base version of Assassin's Creed Valhalla, there are ten armour sets that you can find and equip throughout the game — one of which is only available temporarily. It's not a terrible number, but the issue is that it won't be long until the microtransaction store actually features more armour sets than the base game — it's already up to eight, with a new set being added every two weeks.
To make matters worse, these additional armour sets from the store boast perks and stat bonuses that you won't find elsewhere, and some of them are arguably much more effective than what you'll find in the core release. Is it pay-to-win if Valhalla's a single player game? Debatable, but this growing discrepancy is sparking a lot of debate within the Assassin's Creed community.
Some fans feel as though it's only a matter of time until things spiral out of control, and the store becomes littered with equipment that's simply better than what you'll find in the main game. Others argue that these kinds of microtransactions are important, as they help fund the ongoing development of free content updates. It's quite a complex topic when all factors are taken into account, but again, it's not a good look for the game — at least not at first glance.
The bottom line here is that Assassin's Creed Valhalla is a massive game, and you certainly don't have to surrender yourself to the microtransaction store in order to enjoy it. But even so, we'll soon reach a point where the store features more unique armour sets than the game itself, and that seems out of whack.
It's worth noting that you can technically unlock these armour sets through gameplay. Set pieces can show up for sale in your settlement, but stock is on rotation. And since each armour set is made up of five different pieces, it'll take an eternity to complete your collection. Not to mention that the in-game currency used to buy these items is limited, based on both weekly and daily quest rewards.
What do you make of Valhalla's armour set situation? Would you like to see Ubisoft pay more attention to content that's actually in the game as opposed to updating the store on a regular basis? Plan a raid in the comments section below.
Comments 69
Should be no surprise here with this latest AAA publisher tactic. Get the reviews and metacritic scores established, then slowly pour in the missing ingredient, micro-transactions!
Its Ubisoft so why would anyone be surprised, they've been heading down this route for years. Odyssey's store contains nearly 30 customisation packs which can't be found in game and their "microtransaction" of £83.99 for the XXL Helix credits isn't even good for half of them
I never even checked what was on the store. I did buy a cool bear head "helmet" from the opal guy though
Most games these days are nothing more than glorified slot machines, and I guess it's the reason I don't play them as often anymore.
@Arugula Any game that features MTX will have incentives in place for you to buy them. There's no way gameplay won't be compromised to some degree.
For the first time ever, I bought a set of armour (granted, it was with credit I was given for Christmas), but it was for the Draugr set that looked incredible! None of the other armour in the game looked any better than the original Raven set you start with.
I have been into Video game consoles since my Dad bought home a Machine that played "Pong" then Atari had Frogger space invaders then I got into Sonic and Mario.............Zelda FF7 GTA3 all groundbreaking add Half life and MGS PES and Gran Turismo.......I have had a good run....but for me the Video game console is stopping at PS4 Happy Gaming Everyone and Goodnight.
pay to win implemented incrementally, lovely scum
Ubisoft pulling an Ubisoft. No surprise here.
I don't like the way they handle armour in this game compared to Odyssey. It costs so many resources to upgrade an armour to full stats that once I'd upgraded the first raven set you get, I never bothered with the others since the stats aren't that amazing anyway, and none of them look that notably different. I hope we get some cooler/different looking armours from the store like we did in Odyssey with the Athena and Wonder Woman looking one.
@Arugula But what if (just imagine) you didn't have to buy that shiny armor you find so attractive? What if (I know it's crazy) you could get it by just playing the game? What if (no really, think about it) it was a reward for doing something very interesting in the game? Wouldn't that be better, even for you?
I mean it's no like Ubisoft "needs" the microtransaction money. And certainly not in a single player game when they have other games based on system that are bound to microtransactions for continuing support (like Rainbow Six Siege or The Division 2 for example)...
I am around 8 hours in AC:V and didn't even found store, which is a good sign. On the other hand, I've been sniffing every corner of settlement and didn't found out how to use custom trees from my inventory... Maybe I must progress in story...
A complicated topic but one absolute truth and where I draw the line remains: pay to win is always wrong. It undermines the philosophy of what a game is, especially in any competitive environment.
I was interested on getting this one, not anymore.
I play the game on PC and use certain 3rd party software to unlock store content for free.
The sets on store are minimal increase, not game changing at all,
There's more than enough great armor in game to collect that will make everything easy ( duel weird excalibur with thors hammer and thor set unending stun with huge cleave radius)
Dint like the mtx's just don't look at them simple
Remember it's also for people who don't have time unending to play and when they maybe they want to look cool or be overpowered, do be it don't act so offended like this wasn't going to happen or its new
@Octane That's fundamentally untrue. Even in regards to this series alone it is untrue.
AC Origins had armor sets you could buy with microtransactions, but armor in that title provided no gameplay perks. They were merely cosmetic.
The same thing is true of a lot of popular microtransaction-laden games like Fortnite and Apex Legends.
It's up to the game to decide whether its microtransations amount to a gameplay advantage. Ubisoft has shifted its stance, that's likely partly why fans of the series are upset with Valhalla in particular.
You want to buy it, you buy it. You don't then don't.
Assassins Creed Valhalla is still quite doable with the in game stuff, if you want to play it overpowered by using your chequebook then so be it, pick up that XP booster at the same time.
If this was a MP pay to win then that would be a different point, but as it's single player then it's down to personal choice.
For the rest of us, vote with your wallet and just enjoy the game.
Lastly, don't be the plonker who gives their 10 year old their credit card number 'accidentally' who then goes online and buys everything, before whinging on the news about it.
@Octane This is the key point that most gloss over.
@MFTWrecks I disagree completely. Even something as benign as cosmetics have a huge impact on the core game. AC:Valhalla is a great example of this.
Instead of giving you rewards (for quests, tasks, etc...) that have some tangible in game benefit, AC:Valalla gives you cosmetics. Everywhere you look the game is just oozing cosmetic rewards. Many modern "micro-transaction" based games are the same, how often was that the case prior to micro-transactions? The existence of micro-transactions in games have fundamentally changed the core game loop and rewards.
I honestly think the microtransaction debate is a bit silly. Loot boxes can be bad, since it hits the same part of your brain as gambling, but microtransactions are just additive. Buy them or don't buy them. It's a single player game. If you don't like them, don't buy them!
Personally I put 130 hours into this, enjoyed it a lot, got the platinum, and have moved on.
I have no idea why anyone would want to buy additional outfits but to each their own I suppose. With regards pay to win, I'm not sure that applies to a single player game, particularly one that is really quite easy at least on normal difficulty.
Turn on 1-hit stealth kills and you don't really need great equipment. Most boss fights can be won by dodging and then attacking with a fast weapon when they are open or tired.
Now we defending NPCs from P2W? 🤦♂️
You are swilling in gear just by playing the game, nobody needs any of this - Unless they feel like it. And that is their business.
Real money stuff rotates into Reda's shop. Just keep 150 credit saved for the daily refresh.
I paid £59 for this game on release and I’ve put nearly 80 hours into it. I’m happy with that. I’ll probably purchase the season pass because I’m interested in the Ireland content. I’ve never felt I needed to go down the microtransactions route but I would perhaps consider it if I saw something I REALLY liked. Also, i think Ubisoft are quite good supporting their games for all the stick they get. If these transactions are what keeps it alive then so be it. You don’t need them to complete the game
@Number09 wow you've really made a stand, I'm going to rethink my own....oh no wait, I don't care. See ya.
Once again, people trying to create problems where they don't exist (in my opinion).
It's a single player game. No pvp. Pay to win? really?
First, they have the right to add payed content
Second, although i would never spent a penny buying this stuff, i have the right to spend my money where i want. NO one has the right to say otherwise.
Third, so what if there are more armour sets to buy? And more powerfull? if they didn't add any or added 100, would it make a difference to your experience if you are not buying them?
Real problems are bugs in the game, that people seem to accept has normal, or unfinished features.
It's a "global" problem, existing in most games now.
Actually, it's THE problem actually. The biggest one. and people are just ok with that..
go figure..
@LowTech People have been making fun of Ubisoft and their buggy games for years now, PushSquare have made articles about the bugs in Legion or Valhalla when they released, where do you get the impression that everybody is okay with that ? And it's not because this is a problem that anything else is fine. Why is it that Ubisoft has the time to create content created to be bought with real money in a single player video game but they can't spend the time to polish and release their games in a stable state ?
Isn't P2W for multiplayer games. In single player you can just turn the settings to easy and that would make the game easier than any armour would.
I think it's up to the player to decide if they like the cosmetics enough to buy it. If the armour actually have you a competitive advantage than they would have a case.
People are probably crying because their photo mode pics doesn't look as good as others and they aren't getting the attention they wanted.
@Katsuhono I agree, BuggySoft has this tradition, but it's a global problem now. And people are ok and deffend the games like it's a football club.. There are people actually deffending Cyberpunk, just to give you an extreme example..
I would tend to agree with you on the time spending, but actually most times one thing is not related to the other. i am not saying that what you are saying is impossible, but most of the time the teams are not the same, so resources are not being used on the wrong stuff. Yes, sometimes having more people working on the same thing get's things done faster, but there is a saying in devellopment: "9 pregnants don't get you a baby in one month".
But again, the article should be about "why do we have payed content being added every 2 weeks but the game is still buggy as hell?".
I honestly am not bothered about armour sets, I played and finished the game, I don't think I changed my armour or weapon once. I upgraded them but other than that not bothered. I was same with Spiderman didn't bother changing my suite once.
@LowTech Oh yeah I'm sure the cosmetics and the bugs are not technically linked at all, it's more about the message it sends, they are fine with asking money from player ready to spend it while having a game that was barely finished on launch day. You said it well in the last part of your post.
@Octane I think i am almost finishing the game 100% and never once i felt compelled to buy anything. It's just a single vender that has stuff. and if you don't have internet on, it won't even do anything.. Maybe what you are saying it's true. Maybe it isn't. But if it is, they haven't done a very good job at it..
It is a completely false narrative that these multi-billion dollar companies need microtransaction to fund small updates. Their games sometimes make close to a billion dollars just from initial sales. The one and only reason microtransactions exist is to make more money for the shareholders - who are, generally speaking, already rich and clueless about games.
IN MY DREAMS: I fight to the top of the mountain. The air is thick with smoke from the burning villages below. The cave entrance is dark and ominous. Venturing inside, the low rumble of dragon breath physically makes the walls shake. I round the corner, and there the beast lies, atop a mountain of gold and treasure. An epic battle ensues, my health potions reduced to nothing. After what seems an eternity, I settle my foot on the head of the downed beast. I am rewarded amply with a set of unique Dragonscale armor. Triumphant, I emerge into the light once more.
IN MY UBISOFT NIGHTMARE: I enter the ominous cave. I round the corner slowly, my heart in my throat. Ahead I spy the Dragon. He wears bifocals and a see-through green visor. He sits behind a gigantic cash register. Behind him is a beautiful set of Dragonscale armor. I ask how much. He tells me I can afford it! I pull out my coinpurse fairly bursting with Imperial Drakes. He eyes me sideways. "Not THAT kind of coin, fair knight. No no no, that just won't do." My heart sinks.
@LordSteev the heart is not enough...that made my day. Thank you
I've spent $100 in that store and I have no regrets. It is optional. It is a single-player game where the core experience is absolutely incredible without it. I've sunk 130 hours into the game and still haven't beaten it.
Anybody who claims Ghost of Tsushima was game of the year quality then supports Ubisoft’s Valhalla is a bold face hypocrite
@jmac1686 Big Wallet Billy over here flexing his spending habits on digital nonexistent items that apparently have no bearing on the experience but felt compelled to pay for anyway! Bravo!! You have just been indoctrinated into the “played yourself” Hall of Fame
It’s frustrating that the coolest stuff has to be bought. I get why they do that because games cost more to make and then have to rely on those to help boost profits. But at the same time I could care less about the microtransactions. It’s single player and the combat of very easy so I really don’t need better armor than I already have.
Also I think they should get ride of the seasonal stuff because it’s not very good and brings in more glitches (so far at least). I’d rather they just add more weapons and armor sets every few weeks that can be bought with silver
I have to say I used to hate microtransactions and dlc in games but my attitude now is who cares. There are so many games to choose from now and so much content for each game if you think it's not worth it then move along. If it's pay to win and you have a problem with that then play 1 of the many other similar games instead.
Thanks Ubisoft for keeping me from buying your garbage games.
@2cents not that it pertains to me but I earnestly don’t follow your logic. Could you elaborate?
@thedevilsjester If an in-game reward or item purchased via microtransactions offers a gameplay benefit (as armor in Valhalla is said to do, as compared to Origins armor which does not) then it is NOT just a cosmetic.
And that's why it's an issue with this specific title's player base.
@MFTWrecks I wasn't saying it was just cosmetic. I was saying 75% of the games rewards are just cosmetic. Huge swathes of the game only rewards cosmetics and this is a trend to push players to want cosmetics so they will pay for more. My point being that even pure cosmetic micro transactions are not done in a bubble, the core game loop suffers because it is built around funneling you towards these.
For me, the issue is purely changing a game post release, and not for the betterment of the player's experience.
It's not a question of how much time and money I have, it's more the accountability of the publisher to make sure they stay fair.
It is all very good and well to say a derivative of "well, I'm ok Jack" and what is being done here may be nothing too insidious.
If though, with every title, the publisher pushes the boundaries a little more, how long is it before a patch nerfs the base equipment while introducing shiny new items to purchase?
Even if you are cash and time rich, we still have to keep an eye on what companies are doing now post release so that we can continue to make informed choices about buying a game.
Hopefully for the better, in Cyberpunk's case.
One day in the future Ubi or someone might try the equivalent of what Apple did when they artificially lowered performance of "last year's" iPhones.
I'd like to think we can all agree we have to be vigilant for future behaviours like that, because keeping them out of our hobby benefits us all long term.
They have been doing this since Origins and Odyssey had tons, you play a Ubi game nowadays you should expect this sadly.
@2cents I don't think you know what a hypocrite is, loving two different games doesn't make you a hypocrite.
So can you stealth in this game? If so is there a set you can buy / earn in game to help with that or is the only real equipment to boost stealth (outside of perks/skilltrees/whatever this has) a paid item?
That's why I don't buy ubisoft games at full price, I still want to play this when the game is discounted to $20 or $30 on psn
Another post, another list of entitlement brats demanding everything in the game be included as free content.
Look, the items that are for sale are optional, and not mandatory. If it's difficulty that's a botherance, just simply adjust the difficulty setting. There's no real legitimate argument against buying or abstaining from buying these OPTIONAL items, it's your pregorative either way. If you're that adamant about getting it, there are still ways in the game to get them, without having to buy them. Instead you invest your time, as opposed to your money. It's a fair trade.
The persistent whinging and moaning about this however is just childish.
@MFTWrecks What are you talking about, cosmetics in ac origins have great gameplay advantages, I spent the whole game with an axe and a shield and a horse that were from the deluxe edition.
Micro transactions in assassins creed have no benefit other than looking cool they never have if you like them buy them.....this game is easy anyway.
I dont understand why anyone would spend good money to xp boost just play the game then your money buying the game is well invested.
How is this any more pay to win than the xp boosts and whatnot? Standard Ubisoft / (JIm Sterling voice) "triple A" practice.
I ignored even the basic sets and I was able to finish the campaign without dying once. So yeah. Easy to ignore imho
There is DEFINITELY an element of Whales paying for the free content for everyone else and the system being designed for this.
How you feel about this will likely influence your views on the MTX.
I'm just glad that Yule Festival is over, so my Avior doesn't load into the game drunk anymore. Man that was annoying!
I got the platinum trophy without paying for anything.
People need to stop whining and just play.
The stuff u get in the game itself is more than overpowered enough to easily finish it.
@OthmaneAD You seem to not know what "cosmetic" means.
Your armor in AC Origins was purely cosmetic. It changed your look, but had no gameplay benefit. One outfit didn't give you a gameplay advantage over another.
Your weapons, which effect gameplay, are not cosmetics. They directly impact gameplay due to their perks and stats and such.
Valhalla adds perks to armor, so they are therefore not (purely) cosmetic as they once were. They now provide a gameplay benefit or change.
If people stop paying for it, then they will stop doing this! simples
I see no issue, if these armour sets were pure cosmetics then people would complain Ubi are charging for simple skins.
Like all DLC If you don't want it don't buy it.
Why bother? In 2 years it will all be available for $20. All the DLC and all the sets. Origins and to a lesser extent Odyssey have things mostly in game with a few silly exceptions.
It’ll follow the same pattern, because it’s a single player game.
This is why i just wait for the complete/gold/deluxe edition for $20 and get everything included.
Its a Single Player game so waiting doesn't change anything. Plenty of other games to play
Well for me I loved the game and still playing with close to 100 hours of game play. With no micro transactions paid. I refuse to pay for those extra things. Some people do and to me it’s fine. As long as the game is not pay to win.
Why spend money when you can unlock the Thor armour, happy days.
@Kragge you’d be missing out. It really is a great game and you don’t need to buy extra stuff. They pass power points out like candy. Unlike odyssey.
Look, here's the deals. GAAS is great, it helps keep money flowing to the developer so that the devs can keep working and checks notes getting sexually and physically abused by the management, who get all that extra cash.
Nothing morally or ethically wrong there. Plus I really enjoy the game and need a way to justify to myself my complicit support of this behaviour.
@Richnj
The industry has decided that people are less outraged by micro-transaction cosmetics, and so huge chunks of "modern" games are now designed to push gamers to want or use cosmetics, regardless of your choice to participate in the micro transactions.
AC:Valhalla is a prime example of this design choice. Nearly every major quest or task reward is a cosmetic. Tattoos, clothes, boat decals, settlement adornments, hair cuts, etc...
I couldn't care less about micro transactions as a general concept; but there is no way to include them, and make them a desirable addition, without impacting all players, regardless of your choice to participate in them.
I mean...I understand the disdain, but I never once felt like I was "Underpowered" throughout the whole of AC: Valhalla. I'm a completionist when it comes to the AC series, so I was regularly venturing into the higher zones. The three witch sisters were the only battles that even posed a modicum of difficulty, so I don't really buy the whole, "But these premium armors give out such good perks." The base game allowed me to be OP already...how much more do people need?
Why would anyone care? it's a single player game, you don't have to buy them, in all honesty the game isn't even hard, you could beat it with no armor at all if you wanted.
Tap here to load 69 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...