Assassin's Creed Shadows

The problem with reviewing a "100-hour" RPG like Assassin's Creed Shadows is that impressions and opinions change as the hours roll on. A game like this has to be so creatively tuned and refined that doing the same or similar things for hours and hours remains feeling fresh and fun, and it's precisely because of this that I find myself in a bit of a dilemma with this title. I had an original perception of this game, and then following another weekend of play time, notching around 20 more hours into the experience, my impression has shifted a tad. So, with that in mind, let's do this again.

There are perhaps only a handful of games that are faced with the same challenges as Assassin's Creed Shadows. No, I'm not talking about toxic community nonsense and boycotting and the likes, I'm talking about the weight that is being thrust upon this game's shoulders. Ubisoft is in a dire place right now, far from where it once operated and positioned itself. The company is haemorrhaging value, consistently shutting down studios and games, frequently in acquisition rumours, and all of this seems to lead to one common connotation: Assassin's Creed Shadows needs to save Ubisoft's future. That's the way that this game has often felt, as though it has to be the saving grace for Ubisoft, and whether it will be enough to right Ubisoft's ship is an entirely different story.

Before we received Assassin's Creed Origins almost a decade ago, the series had begun to feel very stale and repetitive, and after Assassin's Creed Odyssey and Assassin's Creed Valhalla, it is starting to feel that way again. What we come to expect from one of these games now befits the typical Ubisoft formula of a massive open-world, dotted with question mark points of interest, utilising a combat suite that is more action-RPG oriented and a far detraction from the stealth-first routes of the first titles. There are lootable chests packed with gear that make the hero stronger, a more supernatural and mythical theme, and all of this makes up an adventure that could last you well over 100 hours. Assassin's Creed Shadows is no different in many metrics, but there are improvements and evolutions in multiple core areas, changes that do adjust the formula and alter how we know and experience an Assassin's Creed game in 2025. But is it enough?

I'm not entirely convinced. But before I get into why, let me shine a spotlight on one of this game's strongest features: its narrative. Ubisoft has gone down the route of a politically-charged story that revolves around Oda Nobunaga and his conquest of Japan, something that is supported by a mysterious and powerful group. If you've seen Shogun, the narrative that is being woven and told here is very similar, with betrayal and conspiracy, and warring factions and fearless heroes from foreign shores at the forefront. This narrative approach works and improves on former narratives in the series by leaps and bounds. The people and characters you meet along the way feel real and important, and you do get wrapped up in a tale that has unexpected twists and turns too. There are occasional choices to be made that don't feel as impactful as many games with choices, but the fact that you can put your stamp on the story in even just a minor way is compelling. My only slight concern with this narrative approach is that like Shogun (and the TV adaptation's clear inspiration, Game of Thrones) sometimes it can feel as though there are too many storylines being pursued at once, threads that can lose their importance, partly due to the more open nature of the game and the fact that you can tackle missions and side quests in quite a free manner. The player agency is fantastic, but that has a cost when it comes to narrative pacing and weight.

One of the other areas that Ubisoft has looked to expand and build on former ideas is in its protagonists. In Shadows, we don't have an identity choice to begin with as is the case with Eivor in Valhalla, or a setup where you choose either Kassandra or Alexios in Odyssey. In Shadows, you get to play as both the nimble shinobi Naoe and the hefty samurai Yasuke, with both characters having vastly different playstyles and mechanics. I do applaud the creative risk that this is and I can see the places where this works, once again especially in the player agency department. However, in practice it has kinks. The Assassin's Creed formula is not for samurai, and this means that Yasuke (perhaps fittingly) feels like a man out of place, with the game clearly being designed and built around Naoe and her abilities. Yasuke cannot parkour or climb well, he's hopeless at stealth, and in combat he lacks the finesse and skill of Naoe, making him feel like a bull in a China shop. Granted there are occasions where Naoe feels out of place, for example in boss fights against a larger foe or a group of enemies, a situation where her agility and low health feels less impactful when compared to Yasuke's strength and armour. It's with this in mind that Shadows exists in a sort of creative limbo where it simply doesn't feel as though the gameplay has quite been structured and refined to fit its dual-hero setup.

But even though it's not the game's strongest element, it's not nearly its weakest or most divisive. For me, this is the open-world. To begin with, the Feudal Japan that Ubisoft has built is absolutely beautiful and creatively diverse. The verticality and geography, the usage of greenery and foliage, the incredible variation in the castle and urban design, all of this is top of the line and truly great. The problem is that after tens of hours, the world loses its charm and stops feeling particularly exciting to explore. This isn't a Kingdom Come: Deliverance II where the world feels alive and unexpected, or even a Valhalla where the land is dotted with so much content that you can hardly breathe at times. Shadows can feel barren and lacking and that's for a handful of reasons.

The question mark points of interest system needs to be left in the past now. It's tired and boring and has felt dated for years. It also feels incredibly disappointing when you travel to a question mark only to discover it's a shrine or a village with literally nothing to offer the player. Why Ubisoft decided to move on from Valhalla's fun and refreshing World Events bewilders me, and the lack of compelling boss fights in the open world also disappoints. The one weakness of championing stealth is that you lose the tactile and challenging nature of the action-RPG combat encounters that Valhalla so excellently delivered with battles against the Daughters of Lerion or deadly wildlife, or even Odyssey's wandering Mercenaries. The castles, as grand as they are, also need a design refresh as it becomes a little fatiguing to constantly head to castles and be asked to complete the same objectives to "conquer" them. The quest design is similarly uninspired too, with almost every target you are tasked with hunting being set up in the same formula; with the player being handed a loose location and then being tasked with finding the target in that inexact zone. This series has been screaming out for a more Hitman-like approach for a while, where you can tackle the situation at hand in a multitude of ways, instead of simply heading to an area and then stabbing the target in the neck...

Talking about the map, one of my main frustrations is the way the game imposes and blocks you from exploration at times by stopping the player from being able to climb minor inclines and the likes. It has no problem whatsoever with the player running across icy rooftops in the winter, but climbing a hill during the summer will see Naoe sliding down as though she's a spider attempting to climb out of a bathtub.

The viewpoints now feel like a necessary evil, serving as a handy way to easily traverse the enormous map using fast travel, but I would be remiss to note that the placement of many in occupied castles and enemy territory can be a nuisance to say the least. Thankfully, the Kakurega bases help aid in this a bit, even if their purpose underwhelms too, by simply serving as a place where you can refill supplies and access refreshable contracts that reward resources. And this brings me to another area that I really no longer care for in Assassin's Creed games: resources and lootable chests.

The level of interaction in Shadows is often reserved for looting chests that are filled with resources used to upgrade your base or gear, or simply new weapons and armour instead. It'd be fine if there were a handful of these around the map, but there are innumerable amounts, and the majority reward very little... It simply does not feel rewarding to have to open crates to acquire colour-coded tiered gear any more, and like the question marks on the world map, this series is crying out for a change in this format too.

Now, I will say that Ubisoft has made significant strides in areas that also needed attention, namely the progression and the dispatching of Valhalla's ridiculous skill tree. Now, you earn Mastery Points by levelling up and completing quests, with these spent on the few skill trees to unlock new tools and skills, or occasionally improve core attributes. The catch is that to unlock new stages on each skill tree you need to improve your Knowledge Rank, which is done by completing open-world activities marked in red, with many resembling Ghost of Tsushima-like activities, be it meditation or training with Yasuke's sword. Essentially, there is now an actual benefit to doing some things in the open-world, other than simply earning experience and finding better loot.

Also, I will note - despite many of my former thoughts - that Shadows is perhaps the most befitting Assassin's Creed we've seen in years. It feels like a true assassin's story, with stealth once again being a core and important element and the signature sleekness in full effect as well. Assassin's Creed Mirage offered something similar except in a format that felt more akin to last-generation Assassin's Creed with a grander linear structure. Shadows is this modern Assassin's Creed format, except with all the key, and some new, elements and systems in place (whether it's crawling in prone or using a grappling hook to easily climb structures) that enable you to actually treat it as a stealth action game, if you so desire. If you prefer the more direct, Kool Aid man sledgehammer approach, Yasuke is available. But Naoe is the correct way to play this game and through her eyes Ubisoft has crafted an entertaining RPG. Does stealth always work? From my experience, no, but when it does and when enemies don't spot and detect you instantaneously, it's an absolute thrill to chain together assassinations and sneaky kills, and this is by far where the game is at its strongest.

This is all why I find Assassin's Creed Shadows to be an unusual game. On one hand, the grand vision should be celebrated and lauded and there are many elements present that standout and impress. Whether it's the narrative, the combat, the design and appearance, the refined progression, even the hugely improved animations and cutscenes... There's plenty to champion and so much to do that you will get your money's worth and then some. But at the same time, this is the fourth Assassin's Creed game built in this expansive style and it doesn't feel as though the series is really moving forward much. Whatever the next chapter is, strides need to be made to alter how we experience and recognise these titles, because after Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla, and now Shadows, I'm at my wit's end with this unbelievably tiresome open-world format and colour-tiered-gear and lootable resource structure that just lacks any form of charisma.

If I had to provide a quick summary of my time with Assassin's Creed Shadows, I would say it's a sprawling RPG with more hits than misses and that addresses a handful of the series' problems while being held back by several others. It's perhaps the most Assassin's Creed game in years, and that constitutes both many amazing strengths and several annoying weaknesses. It's Ubisoft as you know and love it.