Assassin's Creed: Valhalla

6800xt only matches when resizeable bar is present and active

 

Testing in 20 games the 6800xt was 7% slower than a rtx 3080 so the rtx 3090 is a good deal faster again so that statement is simply not true.

 

It doesn't match the 3090 at 4k - it is 10% slower. But yes, it is faster at lower res.

https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_radeon_rx_6800_xt_review,13.html

 

Quite a lot of people I imagine, myself included.

As someone who games at 1080p/144 Hz the RX 6800 looks extremely sweet - once it can actually be bought and for somewhat reasonable a price.
It will also have better RT performance than my current GPU and DLSS looks like a hastily made Reshade effect to me.

 

It was more as in... people who buys a top end gpu rarely use lower res.

But sure, esports people will love the 6800xt for 1080p 360 hz.

And for the record, i agree about DLSS... if anyone had any doubt about that... lol.

 

Agreed

And to be precise I meant the 6800 non XT in particular.
And that card in particular needs to be cheaper to be a true winner imo.

As it is it's too close to XT pricing and in general more expensive than RTX 3070, depending on model.

At MSRP it would be fair I think, however shave 50 € /$ off the MSRP still and it'd be an absolute no-brainer.

 

so looks like im gonna like it, i will wait for some sale point. got a lot going on right now anyways so
next summer is fine.

 

Was not expecting Ivar to be close to 80 years old taking the year the game takes place along with sources around Ragnar and his sons, course the game adapts and changes things around for the known historical figures but yeah.
Possibly fictional or mixed with other historical figures with vague remaining records or references based on fragments and other surviving details but woah, 794 - 873/874 with one of the most fluid movement styles I've seen in the series ha ha.



Course the game does call out the whole old man thing every now and again to remind players but being a JRPG fan I was assuming like oh he's mid 20's early 30's heh.

 

lol. I can't say I disagree with this

https://slate.com/culture/2020/11/assassins-creed-valhalla-backstory-enough.html

 

Might this have something to do with it?

 

Maybe.

But on the other hand you can reset the whole tree at any time and redo any paths you unlocked but weren't satified with.

Besides - as always - the game doesnt force you to buy any MTX stuff unless you wanna save some time. It's for ppl with RL jobs who have a time problem, not a money problem.

 

XP boosters should be illegal imo.
Ubi sure is fond of them.

 

Yeah that is one interesting advantage to it at least!

In an SP game where the only person who gains is the person who buys it (and Ubi's accountants) I can't say they strike me as something that should be banned/illegal, I'd never buy one but then I have a life/lifestyle where I can easily commit 200+ hours* to a game over a few weeks if that game is good enough to eat my time like that, whereas the vast majority of the world can't, if these boosters help them enjoy their little bit of free time around raising kids or having to work overtime to pay for the mortgage they're behind on or a loved one's medical bill etc. etc. I'm ok with that, gaming is great for improving a person's mental health and outlook on life

*My current records seems to be:
The Division - 667 hours.
Assassin's Creed Odyssey - 244 hours.

 

In multiplayer they should be illegal but in singleplayer they dont hurt any other players

saying that though i do agree they are just plain bad

 

Pay-to-win mechanisms in games you already pay full price for should be illegal imo.

No one is forcing anyone to buy anything, no, but these are a clear bait for people who might be "fooled" into using them.

 

The problem I have with these "time saving MTXs" in single-player games, is that what's stopping the developer / publisher making the game grindy on purpose so that people have an incentive to buy a booster? Sure, it's still "optional", but it's done in a way that's sleazy to me. MTXs aren't born out of somebody's kindness towards people with not much free time.

 

Exactly. MTX's are profiteering, nothing more.

Though what I've heard of Valhalla it's less grindy and better than Odyssey so credit where due. All the more reason to not have XP boosters then.

 

Imo it's a non-issue in this game. You more or less gain 2 skill points with every mission you do.

 

I never had the feeling that AC Origins, Odyssey or Valhalla are grindy on purpose to push players towards MTX.

The last game that did that was the last dead space title and Shadow of Mordor 2.

I really think Ubisoft keeps the balance just right - so far.
It's ok to be concerned of course, just look what Take2 does to RDRO.

Why is nobody upset about that instead i wonder.

 

Oh I am.

Did you see the gold nerf, holy procreating crap why. The outlaw pass now takes 1440 xp per level rather than 1000xp per level, such a greedy update.




But as for the AC games, I've put over 100+ hours into Odyssey and never felt like it was grindy.
I think a lot of it is because the boost option was there people automatically felt negative toward the game.