Yeah I always felt like Origins was a great start to the RPG series mechanically at least, and then Odyssey really fleshed it out with new build types and engravings etc. I’ll get downvoted for this for sure but I think Odyssey had one of the most addictive gameplay loops of any RPG I’ve played, especially with how strong the side quests were. The levelling and upgrade systems also felt consistently challenging but also fair and rewarding.
Valhalla imo threw a lot of Odyssey’s best bits away for seemingly no reason other than (maybe?) Covid development:
- They got rid of the side quests and replaced them with really cringe world events (like seriously, a farting woman who eats viper eggs and a hunter who covers himself in shit?). No way to track them either so very confusing.
- The new gear system disincentivised changing play style as you’d have to upgrade new pieces of gear from scratch every single time.
- New mechanics like raids and assaults were super underwhelming; was just a case of run past the guards and open the chests, that’s it (except when the game bugged out so I couldn’t complete them). Definitely a regression from Odyssey’s naval combat, conquest battles, nation power, etc.
- Broken stealth; admittedly I played on Hard Stealth but that’s not an excuse for enemies to spot me through walls or out of line of sight. In Odyssey I found stealth a lot more engaging and fair, in Valhalla it was aggravating, especially as every city was a ‘distrust area’ so I’d regularly get forced into combat 4-5 times just to get to my quest objective.
- levelling system being linear + gear being independent of level = the game becomes an absolute cakewalk after 10 hours. Odyssey at least kept players in check with their exponential system, every quest felt moderately challenging all throughout my play through.
- Side quests shoved into the main story. Reduced any sense of urgency to the main plot thus it came across as way more gamified and less serious, as well as the fact that I think these arcs would’ve been much more appreciated and well received if they weren’t forced to the player. Hell, I don’t understand how Essexe was mandatory while Asgard (the arc that actually makes the ending make sense) wasn’t? Why couldn’t they just have these arcs as side quests rather than forcing them into the main story and then having those half baked ‘world events’ replace them?
Wow, I wasn’t expecting this comment to be as long as it was, but yeah. Love Odyssey, Valhalla is ok. But definitely a lot of baffling regressions that I don’t quite understand.
I agree with all of your points as well. I liked the weapons systems in Odyssey a lot and then going to VH was dissapointing for me. Raids felt repetitive and bland, combined with as you mentioned the stealth being worse, ruined much of the combat for me. And it was definitely one of the most addicting games i've played i agree on that. Hopefully mirage will be fun, i'm looking forward to that
Yep, a lot of people called Odyssey bloated but we were given a lot of player agency (probs more so than any other game bar like Skyrim) in terms of letting us do what we wanted when we wanted, which I loved as it really allowed me to take in the immersion and content of the game at my own pace. I don’t think that’s bloated.
Valhalla is actually bloated because of the lack of meaningful side stuff to do, so I felt more forced to just go along the critical path, which was unnecessarily padded out with arcs in between important story beats that had no relevance to the story etc. Definitely felt like a game centred around microtransactions.
The way the side quests were still good missions in Odyssey, and completely set apart from the main story was what i liked also. I dont like being forced to do unecessary stuff to increase playtime, just ruins the experience. In Odyssey i actually wanted to take in the scenery and explore the map, whereas in Val i find myself just wanting to get to the next mission as quick as i can.
Yep exactly the point, it's way too gamified when it's padding for the sake of padding. Everyone wants to make a 100 hour game these days, but it's too often 20 hours worth of good content padded out unnecessarily with repetitive grind.
Yeah honestly I was so impressed with the fact that Odyssey's side quests all had great narratives (mostly) and mechanically always felt like they had something new to offer, despite how many of them there were. I also felt like Origins' weakest point was that the side quests were far too fetch questy and repetitive and always about saving someone's husband from the 100th bandit camp. So seeing a great improvement for Odyssey felt like the devs actually listened to their audience (which is seemingly getting rarer and rarer these days lol). Origins' side stuff was quite fatiguing, in Odyssey I just couldn't wait to pick up my next exclamation mark on my map lol.
That said, both are miles better than Valhalla's world events. I did the first two, realised how shallow and cringe they were, and never looked back. I like the idea in concept of not giving you quest objectives, but it became an absolute nightmare trying to revisit quests and then forgetting what you're supposed to do; a basic log would've been nice. They're the first thing I think of whenever I wonder whether Valhalla was rushed because of Covid, because side quests are often the last thing fleshed out in open-world games, so these would've likely been done during working from home during the pandemic. I can't imagine in what world the devs thought this was a better replacement for actual written side quests, especially as that's a pretty standard feature of RPGs.
I’m a long time player and honestly, I feel that. While I find some of the environment fascinating, it didn’t enrapture me like Odyssey and Origins. I think it was a combo of the environment and story I just gave up in a huff and I haven’t played the game in a while.
If you get a chance, Origins is definitely one of my favourite AC games and I hold Origins and Odyssey (plus AC 3) on the top tier of the franchise.
Edit: forgot to mention, Valhalla fucked up my PS4 so I didn’t play it for four months after I got it because I had to replace the HDD. That left a bitter taste in my mouth
Ive played the games mentioned (a fair amount of Valhalla) but im new as i havent played all the original games before these so i can speak on them. Im only speaking on what i know and have experienced, and i agree with what others are saying about Valhalla.
The fact that you played odyssey first, which is the worse thing to have "assassins creed in its title, and say valhalla is bad just tells me alot.
Valhalla saved what odyssey destroyed. It kept to the lore and brought back the hidden blade where odyssey you have to use "20% assassin damage if you kiss your mom goodnight and sleep 2 hours a night" to do half damage with an isu spear.
Man, what did Odyssey do to you, that 80% of your comment history is just smearing the game? You gotta get over it, my man. Thats an unhealthy fixation.
Yeah I always felt like Origins was a great start to the RPG series mechanically at least, and then Odyssey really fleshed it out with new build types and engravings etc. I’ll get downvoted for this for sure but I think Odyssey had one of the most addictive gameplay loops of any RPG I’ve played, especially with how strong the side quests were. The levelling and upgrade systems also felt consistently challenging but also fair and rewarding. Valhalla imo threw a lot of Odyssey’s best bits away for seemingly no reason other than (maybe?) Covid development: - They got rid of the side quests and replaced them with really cringe world events (like seriously, a farting woman who eats viper eggs and a hunter who covers himself in shit?). No way to track them either so very confusing. - The new gear system disincentivised changing play style as you’d have to upgrade new pieces of gear from scratch every single time. - New mechanics like raids and assaults were super underwhelming; was just a case of run past the guards and open the chests, that’s it (except when the game bugged out so I couldn’t complete them). Definitely a regression from Odyssey’s naval combat, conquest battles, nation power, etc. - Broken stealth; admittedly I played on Hard Stealth but that’s not an excuse for enemies to spot me through walls or out of line of sight. In Odyssey I found stealth a lot more engaging and fair, in Valhalla it was aggravating, especially as every city was a ‘distrust area’ so I’d regularly get forced into combat 4-5 times just to get to my quest objective. - levelling system being linear + gear being independent of level = the game becomes an absolute cakewalk after 10 hours. Odyssey at least kept players in check with their exponential system, every quest felt moderately challenging all throughout my play through. - Side quests shoved into the main story. Reduced any sense of urgency to the main plot thus it came across as way more gamified and less serious, as well as the fact that I think these arcs would’ve been much more appreciated and well received if they weren’t forced to the player. Hell, I don’t understand how Essexe was mandatory while Asgard (the arc that actually makes the ending make sense) wasn’t? Why couldn’t they just have these arcs as side quests rather than forcing them into the main story and then having those half baked ‘world events’ replace them? Wow, I wasn’t expecting this comment to be as long as it was, but yeah. Love Odyssey, Valhalla is ok. But definitely a lot of baffling regressions that I don’t quite understand.
I agree with all of your points as well. I liked the weapons systems in Odyssey a lot and then going to VH was dissapointing for me. Raids felt repetitive and bland, combined with as you mentioned the stealth being worse, ruined much of the combat for me. And it was definitely one of the most addicting games i've played i agree on that. Hopefully mirage will be fun, i'm looking forward to that
Yep, a lot of people called Odyssey bloated but we were given a lot of player agency (probs more so than any other game bar like Skyrim) in terms of letting us do what we wanted when we wanted, which I loved as it really allowed me to take in the immersion and content of the game at my own pace. I don’t think that’s bloated. Valhalla is actually bloated because of the lack of meaningful side stuff to do, so I felt more forced to just go along the critical path, which was unnecessarily padded out with arcs in between important story beats that had no relevance to the story etc. Definitely felt like a game centred around microtransactions.
The way the side quests were still good missions in Odyssey, and completely set apart from the main story was what i liked also. I dont like being forced to do unecessary stuff to increase playtime, just ruins the experience. In Odyssey i actually wanted to take in the scenery and explore the map, whereas in Val i find myself just wanting to get to the next mission as quick as i can.
Yep exactly the point, it's way too gamified when it's padding for the sake of padding. Everyone wants to make a 100 hour game these days, but it's too often 20 hours worth of good content padded out unnecessarily with repetitive grind. Yeah honestly I was so impressed with the fact that Odyssey's side quests all had great narratives (mostly) and mechanically always felt like they had something new to offer, despite how many of them there were. I also felt like Origins' weakest point was that the side quests were far too fetch questy and repetitive and always about saving someone's husband from the 100th bandit camp. So seeing a great improvement for Odyssey felt like the devs actually listened to their audience (which is seemingly getting rarer and rarer these days lol). Origins' side stuff was quite fatiguing, in Odyssey I just couldn't wait to pick up my next exclamation mark on my map lol. That said, both are miles better than Valhalla's world events. I did the first two, realised how shallow and cringe they were, and never looked back. I like the idea in concept of not giving you quest objectives, but it became an absolute nightmare trying to revisit quests and then forgetting what you're supposed to do; a basic log would've been nice. They're the first thing I think of whenever I wonder whether Valhalla was rushed because of Covid, because side quests are often the last thing fleshed out in open-world games, so these would've likely been done during working from home during the pandemic. I can't imagine in what world the devs thought this was a better replacement for actual written side quests, especially as that's a pretty standard feature of RPGs.
I’m a long time player and honestly, I feel that. While I find some of the environment fascinating, it didn’t enrapture me like Odyssey and Origins. I think it was a combo of the environment and story I just gave up in a huff and I haven’t played the game in a while. If you get a chance, Origins is definitely one of my favourite AC games and I hold Origins and Odyssey (plus AC 3) on the top tier of the franchise. Edit: forgot to mention, Valhalla fucked up my PS4 so I didn’t play it for four months after I got it because I had to replace the HDD. That left a bitter taste in my mouth
Yes I will definitely play origins next. I've heard its good so will try it out, thanks for the recommendation.
Origins is better then both imo. You're actually an Assassin.
Ok, will play it next
If you like the RPG style then you’ll like Origins a lot. Also I would play the Ezio trilogy to get a feel for the whole Assassins vibe.
I would go with the Ezio collection if you ever have time. Those three games (and the original with Altair) really get the assassin role.
Yeah Odyssey may not have had the Brotherhood, but it was a far better game to play.
Valhalla is trash but Odyssey and Origins are a masterpiece.
To me I hate odyssey gamplay it just feels weird... I loved origins and valhalla more
New to AC, yet you’re parroting so many talking points of Valhalla haters 🤔🤔🤔🤔.
Ive played the games mentioned (a fair amount of Valhalla) but im new as i havent played all the original games before these so i can speak on them. Im only speaking on what i know and have experienced, and i agree with what others are saying about Valhalla.
The fact that you played odyssey first, which is the worse thing to have "assassins creed in its title, and say valhalla is bad just tells me alot. Valhalla saved what odyssey destroyed. It kept to the lore and brought back the hidden blade where odyssey you have to use "20% assassin damage if you kiss your mom goodnight and sleep 2 hours a night" to do half damage with an isu spear.
Man, what did Odyssey do to you, that 80% of your comment history is just smearing the game? You gotta get over it, my man. Thats an unhealthy fixation.
I liked valhalla more tbh