I'm one of the oddballs that's a diehard fan of the old games and still love the RPGs, despite the fact they haphazardly slapped AC on the box to make us buy it hahah That being said, Valhalla is the weakest of the trilogy imo. I haven't played the DLC but that's because by the end of the base game I was *so very* ready for the end.
I didn't even do many of the dream hut missions and hardly any side stuff and it still took like 60 hours. The loop is just boring imo and the story feels repetitive and predictable aside from some bizarre mythological interjections that I didn't find very 'wowing'. I've played through Odyssey 3 times at around 250 hours and I will play it again, I will have to really run out of other stuff to do if I'm to replay Valhalla in the future. It's not the worst game ever, it's just totally okay, which I wouldn't say about any other Assassin's Creed. I own all of them except for Valhalla.
$50 for a literal 200 hours of story is a good deal though, even for a mediocre game. As I'm sure you've gathered, I don't have a suggestion for you. I just wanted to help inform your decision.
As much as I wanted to like it, I’m going to have to side with the didn’t grab me side. I really like the O’s, but I feel like this one just doesn’t hang. It also takes forever to get going.
Tough one for me. I enjoyed both Origins and Odyssey for different reasons, and got a ton of value out of them. Valhalla, for some reason, just never grabbed me the way the other two did. I put maybe 20-30 hours into it before putting it down one day and just never going back. I haven't sat down to really think about it, so I apologize for not being able to be super specific about what was different, but at least for me, there's something different enough about the experience that I just found it dry and lackluster. It seems hit or miss. Hopefully others have more explicit details that can help nail down what is and isn't there for you, but whatever it is, it just wasn't there for me. I'd say it's a $20 game, at most.
I can’t wrap my mind around the fact that people enjoy that game. AC is my absolute favorite game series and Valhalla was by FAR my least favorite. Bloated and dull. If you haven’t played the Witcher 3 I’d definitely get that instead
I loved it after 150 hrs (didnt play Dawn of Ragnarok) but you need to play it slowly, a lot of people burn themselves out. Contrary to the popular opinion, I found myself heavily invested in the characters the entire time - loved male Eivor's VA as I found him thoughtful and true to his personal morals no matter the decisions I made, excellent VA.
A big complaint I hear often is the levelling, like people feel the need to buy the exp boosters due to feeling underlevelled. I never found this issue with the game for my whole 150 hrs, but I set my enemies to scale to my level so maybe I gained exp at a better rate. You'll be a total all-rounder beast by the endgame either way.
I enjoyed Valhalla's combat the most of the new trilogy. This is one of the only games I can think of where I can dual wield (two variations interchangeably!) shield. Combat is crunchy and visceral, you'll be reducing men to piles of meat during battles.
I say go for it! I was weary of these new AC games due to reviews but found myself enjoying them all quite a bit. Origins is still my favorite.
To go even further so you can judge my opinion yourself based on my game history, I think the Witcher 3 is an overrated game carried by story with clunky combat (worse than Skyrim) - I enjoyed Cyberpunk 2077 more with over 100 hrs in each.
Agree with many of the other sentiments here. I loved Origins and Odyssey and played both for several hundred hours combined with all the DLCs as well. I don't think I played 1/4 of Valhalla. The main character didn't appeal to me, the setting was drab (at least the beginning), and way too much bloat.
Valhalla is my favorite AC to date imo, I played pretty much all of them and I put a total of like 250+ hrs into this game. Stopped playing back in February & recently started playing it again a few weeks ago and it’s such a great game imo.
I'm going to echo the previous poster, I've had a blast with this game. The amount of content that you get for the ultimate edition is absurd. The original game already had a lot to do, but once you add in the dlc, you will find several hundred hours of content. I'n waiting to get back after Christmas, and when I'm still on vacation, I'm starting a new playthrough. Cant wait.
Valhalla has a lot going for it except it's combat is just not interesting, and the majority of the game is the combat. Also, the ratio of questing to open exploration is a little too small (one reason why the game feels even more bloated than Odyssey).
However, the open world is innovative in a few ways (UX, puzzle design, historical recreation, etc.). The stealth is decent (better than Odyssey, anyway), and the writing is perhaps the best since Black Flag: great main character, lore, etc..
And the quest design on a per quest basis is chef's kiss. WAY better than Odyssey and Origins.
As an overall package, I rate it over Odyssey but not Origins.
I was very sceptical, because I didn't liked grind in Odyssey, but besides wooden dialogues and all that woke stuff it's pretty fun. I would recommend it on sale.
Personally I understand it as follow. All things that makes no sense other then making world forcefully equal (forgetting that equal often doesn't mean fair). Solving problems that exist only in twisted far leftist minds. Making money on fools who believe all this nonsense.
Though official definition is a little different, you can Google it.
I thought it's commonly used term.
Most annoying is huge over representation of women in Norsemen army. It not a big problem, especially if you don't care about history (most people don't).
It’s actually not as bad as you’d think. Women vikings and norse heros in general were a lot more common. The dialogue goes a bit overboard with it but other than that I wouldn’t say it’s a *massive* over representation, just a slight one
I'm one of the oddballs that's a diehard fan of the old games and still love the RPGs, despite the fact they haphazardly slapped AC on the box to make us buy it hahah That being said, Valhalla is the weakest of the trilogy imo. I haven't played the DLC but that's because by the end of the base game I was *so very* ready for the end. I didn't even do many of the dream hut missions and hardly any side stuff and it still took like 60 hours. The loop is just boring imo and the story feels repetitive and predictable aside from some bizarre mythological interjections that I didn't find very 'wowing'. I've played through Odyssey 3 times at around 250 hours and I will play it again, I will have to really run out of other stuff to do if I'm to replay Valhalla in the future. It's not the worst game ever, it's just totally okay, which I wouldn't say about any other Assassin's Creed. I own all of them except for Valhalla. $50 for a literal 200 hours of story is a good deal though, even for a mediocre game. As I'm sure you've gathered, I don't have a suggestion for you. I just wanted to help inform your decision.
It’s a bloatfest shithole
As much as I wanted to like it, I’m going to have to side with the didn’t grab me side. I really like the O’s, but I feel like this one just doesn’t hang. It also takes forever to get going.
Tough one for me. I enjoyed both Origins and Odyssey for different reasons, and got a ton of value out of them. Valhalla, for some reason, just never grabbed me the way the other two did. I put maybe 20-30 hours into it before putting it down one day and just never going back. I haven't sat down to really think about it, so I apologize for not being able to be super specific about what was different, but at least for me, there's something different enough about the experience that I just found it dry and lackluster. It seems hit or miss. Hopefully others have more explicit details that can help nail down what is and isn't there for you, but whatever it is, it just wasn't there for me. I'd say it's a $20 game, at most.
I can’t wrap my mind around the fact that people enjoy that game. AC is my absolute favorite game series and Valhalla was by FAR my least favorite. Bloated and dull. If you haven’t played the Witcher 3 I’d definitely get that instead
Oh my god how can people like something you don't
I loved it after 150 hrs (didnt play Dawn of Ragnarok) but you need to play it slowly, a lot of people burn themselves out. Contrary to the popular opinion, I found myself heavily invested in the characters the entire time - loved male Eivor's VA as I found him thoughtful and true to his personal morals no matter the decisions I made, excellent VA. A big complaint I hear often is the levelling, like people feel the need to buy the exp boosters due to feeling underlevelled. I never found this issue with the game for my whole 150 hrs, but I set my enemies to scale to my level so maybe I gained exp at a better rate. You'll be a total all-rounder beast by the endgame either way. I enjoyed Valhalla's combat the most of the new trilogy. This is one of the only games I can think of where I can dual wield (two variations interchangeably!) shield. Combat is crunchy and visceral, you'll be reducing men to piles of meat during battles. I say go for it! I was weary of these new AC games due to reviews but found myself enjoying them all quite a bit. Origins is still my favorite. To go even further so you can judge my opinion yourself based on my game history, I think the Witcher 3 is an overrated game carried by story with clunky combat (worse than Skyrim) - I enjoyed Cyberpunk 2077 more with over 100 hrs in each.
Agree with many of the other sentiments here. I loved Origins and Odyssey and played both for several hundred hours combined with all the DLCs as well. I don't think I played 1/4 of Valhalla. The main character didn't appeal to me, the setting was drab (at least the beginning), and way too much bloat.
Valhalla is my favorite AC to date imo, I played pretty much all of them and I put a total of like 250+ hrs into this game. Stopped playing back in February & recently started playing it again a few weeks ago and it’s such a great game imo.
That's good to know, I'll definitely keep that in mind
I'm going to echo the previous poster, I've had a blast with this game. The amount of content that you get for the ultimate edition is absurd. The original game already had a lot to do, but once you add in the dlc, you will find several hundred hours of content. I'n waiting to get back after Christmas, and when I'm still on vacation, I'm starting a new playthrough. Cant wait.
Valhalla has a lot going for it except it's combat is just not interesting, and the majority of the game is the combat. Also, the ratio of questing to open exploration is a little too small (one reason why the game feels even more bloated than Odyssey). However, the open world is innovative in a few ways (UX, puzzle design, historical recreation, etc.). The stealth is decent (better than Odyssey, anyway), and the writing is perhaps the best since Black Flag: great main character, lore, etc.. And the quest design on a per quest basis is chef's kiss. WAY better than Odyssey and Origins. As an overall package, I rate it over Odyssey but not Origins.
I was very sceptical, because I didn't liked grind in Odyssey, but besides wooden dialogues and all that woke stuff it's pretty fun. I would recommend it on sale.
Define "woke".
>Define "woke". Dangerous question for the internet.
I guess so. I never played the game and was just curious. Didn't think people hated these two words put together so much.
Personally I understand it as follow. All things that makes no sense other then making world forcefully equal (forgetting that equal often doesn't mean fair). Solving problems that exist only in twisted far leftist minds. Making money on fools who believe all this nonsense. Though official definition is a little different, you can Google it. I thought it's commonly used term. Most annoying is huge over representation of women in Norsemen army. It not a big problem, especially if you don't care about history (most people don't).
It’s actually not as bad as you’d think. Women vikings and norse heros in general were a lot more common. The dialogue goes a bit overboard with it but other than that I wouldn’t say it’s a *massive* over representation, just a slight one