ubisoft discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • Kfathy
    Original poster 1 posts

    I'm simply speechless and im wondering why this isn't talked about much more? While something like the setting is subjective, its hard to justify just how much was removed in Valhalla and replaced with.... nothing, or something much worse.

    This might be a long rant, so click back if you aren't interested ! For reference, I have about 300 hours in Odyssey , 170 in Origins, and 130 in Valhalla .

    - no loot drops. I dont want to harp about this obvious point , but I loved the loot system in Odyssey. It was alway exciting to find a better set of gear to drop that improved your character or had better stat bonuses. Loot drops to me are iconic to open world adventure RPGs. Without them its very boring with little to look forward too.

    - the loot system they put in Valhalla instead is terrible. Fixed locations so you always know exactly what you will get. Gear pieces found hours and hours apart, so completing a set can take dozens of hours unless you bee line it to all chests and cheat the game. By time you get another set, you've spent tons of resources to upgrade to legendary status, so there is very little drive or incentive to upgrade another set.

    - the legendary perks, for the most part, are exremely underwhelming . How can I get excited for something like "get 10 attack damage bonus for 2.5 seconds after a perfect dodge". Most bonuses are just meaningless stats numbers.

    - speaking of the stat bonuses. What thr hell do they mean anyways? How does it work exactly? And to make matters worst people who test it found that you'd need dozens of points in a single stat to notice even a miniscule difference ( i.e you would need like 20 bonus points in attach to see attack go up 1 point in stat screen, which in turn translates into very minor bonus damage per hit ). In addition some youtubers like Jorraptor claim a ton of stats dont even work . How is this better than the % bonuses in Odyssey which are easy to understand and have immediate and notable effects right away ? It appears you can completely ignore all these useless stats in Valhalla because they don't mean anything and when they do their effect is extemely minimal!

    - the skill "tree" . Oh boy what a mess. You know your skill tree sucks when your cursor defaults to an auto assign button. Whats the point of this gigantic mess anyways ? The miniscule stat bonuses just give illusion of your character getting incrementally better , and you get so many hundreds of skills points by time you reach max power level, they completely lose any special meaning. Why so many level ups and points? Why not make a concise and clear skill tree like in Odyssey where ever skill point went to a cool ability you've been eyeing as you level up? Why even bother with a skill tree if everyone will end up filling up thr whole thing with excess points to spare ? If you're going to give the entire tree to everyone anyways why even have it? Just give out fixed abilities and bonuses every fixed number of levels and lose the pretense of this being and rpg with unique builds and stats between players. Everyone who reached max level will have the same exact Eivor as everyone else !

    - combat is Valhalla is notably slower, jankier, more disconnected, and much less smooth than Odyssey. What the heck happened ? Im doing a NG+ in Odyssey now and im dodging, rolling, parrying, attacking everyone and it flows like fine wine. The abilities in Odyssey are so so so much better and dont break the flow of rhe combat. Sparta kick, rain of arrows, ring of chaos, and so many more flow thru your combat rhythm so much better than in Valhalla . All of Valhallas abilities abruptly end thr flow of your attacks , many are exremely unbalanced and some very useless (are throw anyone?), and Eivors melee attacks are so awkward and slow and lack range or fluidity . Im just awkwardly spamming the light attack button over and over, often hitting empty air, and don't even bother with heavy attacks due to the completely unnecessary stamina system. What does that add exactly ? And why only a max of four adrenaline bars? Is the intention to make the combat as least enjoyable as possible?

    - why even have the Raven in this game? I think I've used it maybe 10 times in my 120 hour play thru. Wow it highlights in green the area where my objective is. Ok ? Doesnt the green quest icon on the map do the same thing? Why remove the target and chest marking Ikaors ans Senu had? And if you do why even keep the dang thing ?

    - due to limited number of gear pieces, and needing to go to ONE specific NPC AND pay a fee to change an items look via transmog, the whole transmog system in Valhalla is vastly less fun than in Odyssey. I spent hours in Odyssey just customizing thr look of my Alexios. In Valhalla I tried it once, wasted a ton of money, and then realized due to the way armor sets in this game are designed to look correct only with other pieces in same set, mixing and matching parts from various sets very rarely looks anything but a pile of vomit and clash together and often clip textures etc. Trsnsmog is so boring in Valhalla. Why even do this ? Why make it cost money and be tied to a single NPC? What value does that add to the game?

    - the rune system is cumbersome to use, moving runes from one item to another is slow and cumbersome, and as mentioned above, even stacking all your pieces with the same bonus stat will result in minimal, if any, actual real gameplay or noticeable change in the affected attribute. Some diamond runes have ok perks that actually make a difference (like fire or poison after parry critical etc), but how exactly is this better than the fun and varied and very easy to use and understand engraving system in Odyssey? It boggled my mind how anyone think this is an improvement.

    - the long ship. Aka your horse on water. Now granted I realize not everyone loved the Adrestia, but sailing the amazing Aegean sea , being alone in middle of vast ocean at night during a violent thunder storm , and slowly upgrading my ship with better parts and weapons and adding to my customizable crew and cosmetics was magical. What can you do with the long boat exactly that a horse can't do? You can't upgrade it exept with a handful of boat skills they added and you can get them immediately, there is no naval combat, no boarding defeated ships and killing the crew and looting their chests. Nothing even remotely exciting about rhe long ship. I kid you not I probably used it less than a dozen times in my 130 hours of gameplay .I forgot it was even there. My guess it was included in the game so Ubisoft can sell you different skins for it, but thats just my guess. I dont even know why have it , similar to the raven.

    - now this is subjective, but 800s England is to me the most boring setting for an open world possible. Vast, empty countryside and fields, an empty world with little vertical buildings to climb, very small scattering of town and the world jist feels dull and dark and dreary and repetitive. I didn't force them to pick the setting. They did. Norway was kind of cool due to how isolated it felt, but Vinland bored me to tears without a horse and Asgard was the single worst open map I've ever played. I was 90s getting all the tears when I realized the effort for all thst was 5 worthless skill points, that I get hundreds of anyways. I was never more frustrated with a map in my life. Dull, dreary, confusing to navigate, just a chore to get thru. The second mythical map was marginally better, but still so tedious and boring. Odyssey and Origins maps were so much more interesting and majestic. Nothing can beat the various pyramids and tombs and cities like Memphis and Alexandria, and nothing in my 35 years of gaming can match the beauty and granduer of the islands of Greece surrounded by the vast and beautiful Aegean sea.

    - speaking of sea, what happened to all the underwater ship wrecks , tombs, sunken fortresses etc you had in Origins and especially Odyssey? It was so exciting to find one and have to avoid crocodiles or sharks to loot the treasure at the bottom and make it back up safely to your ship. I think in Valhalla there was only a handful and they were empty and boring. Also why thr lack of sea creatures besides tiny fish? I think I saw seals but thats it. The ocean and rivers are as lifeless as the map itself.

    - the story in Valhalla boils down to going to 20 areas on the map and having them pledge allegiance. Halfway thru this process I was so sick of how repetitive it was.

    - the dynamic angles during conversations is gone in Valhalla. In Odyssey when talking to an NPC the camera would often switch angle and views to add a cinematic flair to the scene . Why on earth remove that from Valhalla?

    - the facial animation in Valhalla is a noticeable step down from Odyssey. Expressions, eye and head movements, etc look so oddly animated in Valhalla . There is just something unsettling about them, with a few exceptions (Eivor, Ivarr, etc ). What happened? They had it nailed down in Odyssey .

    - no side quests. I dont wsnt to state the obvious. But Valhalla has no side quests . Luke Thomas on YouTube did a very detailed study and found that average mystery in Valhalla lasts under 3 minutes and average side quest in Odyssey more than 4 or 5 times that, giving you time to form an emotional investment in the characters and giving a memorable story.

    I was so disappointed in Valhalla, and im wondering if covid was the cause of all the massive step down compared to previous 2 games, but quarantine only started in last 8 months of development , which implies at some point these cut backs were purposely done.

    I reslly hope the next AC game complete ignores every thing Valhalla did and go back the system in Odyssey. Loot, naval, rpg mechanics , skill tree and points, combat flow and fun abilities, etc.



  • Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

    Contrary to popular belief, Lorem Ipsum is not simply random text. It has roots in a piece of classical Latin literature from 45 BC, making it over 2000 years old. Richard McClintock, a Latin professor at Hampden-Sydney College in Virginia, looked up one of the more obscure Latin words, consectetur, from a Lorem Ipsum passage, and going through the cites of the word in classical literature, discovered the undoubtable source. Lorem Ipsum comes from sections 1.10.32 and 1.10.33 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum" (The Extremes of Good and Evil) by Cicero, written in 45 BC. This book is a treatise on the theory of ethics, very popular during the Renaissance. The first line of Lorem Ipsum, "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet..", comes from a line in section 1.10.32.

  • As1r0nimo
    345 posts

    Speachless? Sure...
    But most of your post is pure subjective opinion. Idk, why bother.

  • OrcBeard92
    180 posts

    @kfathy Disagree with many of your points, but I will agree Valhalla has been a step backward in some areas. Mostly for me, it is the general sloppy release, and the game being unfinished, rather than anything specifically wrong with it at core.

    I think in quite a few areas, it actually does things much better than Odyssey, or Origins in particular. It is just let down by some silly mistakes. I could go through and counter every one of your points, but I won't, because it is my opinion, and you are entitled to yours.

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @orcbeard92 i totally understand and respect your opinion, and I certainly don't expect anyone to respond to my entire rant point by point! I was just venting because I was truly looking forward to Valhalla after Origins and Odyssey, two of my favorite games ever.

    But to keep the discussion going , let me pick the biggest core issue of this game , since you said the core of it is fine:

    How is the new skill tree and stat system better than in Odyssey? The reason they went with the baffling "+2.5 attack " or "+1.4 critical chance" system rather than Odyssey much easier to understand % stat system is because if they went with % you would see that this "2.5% attack" really means ".0001% attack increase". This is designed to artificially make the skill tree appear bigger and give players the false illusion of progressing their Eivor. Its all smoke and mirror. Many YouTube personalities tested this, but if you want to do it on your own, find a set and runes thst increase your attack stat (stack ad much as you want) and hit an enemy and note attack number that pops up over them. Now take off all your gear and hit him again. Thr number would not change, and that is because you would need dozens of + attack points to even see damage number even go up 1 point !

    This means most of the legendary sets and runes are utterly pointless. They don't do anything becusse whatever stat bonuses they give you is far too little to make any difference at all. You can take all your armor peices off and your Eivor would be virtually identical to a fully decked out one!

    Another big one is transmog system. How is forcing you to pay and go to specific NPC to do it an improvement?

    How is removing all functionality from the Raven an improvement ? All that does if force you to constantly spam Odins sight . I had to remap it to R3 on my controller because I got tired of having to stop to hit up on d pad

    I also feel so strongly about the new loot system. Im playing NG+ in Odyssey now with a 300 hr character and I STILL check each epic gear i collect to find pieces with crit chance and crit damage on them to make my build just much better. Its so much more exciting and interesting to make actual builds and save them in a slot in Odyssey!

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @orcbeard92 forgot to mention the last straw that finally made me drop Valhalla entirely:

    I was surprised but all the YouTube videos popping up that showed most stats in the game have little if any effect. So I wanted to see this for myself.

    I went to Gloucshire (because its prettiest town in game and also has a nice concentration of enemies), i found them for a bit, and on last enemy I hit a few times and noted attack number that popped up: 47, 48, 47

    Then I relaoded my save and since I had skill tree maxed out, I reset all my points so no points are assigned. Next took off all my armor gear and only kept same weapon I was using in right hand . My eivor was essentially rhe eivor I started the game with.

    Fought same exact group of enemies as before. I noticed ZERO difference. Nothing. I felt EXACTLY as I was before. I was in total shock that after 130 hours of slowly leveling up my character dozens of times and assigning hundreds of skill points, my blank , naked Eivor took just as many hits to kill the same exact enemies, took just as much damage as before , dodged and rolled and parried same exact way... despite my best efforts doing this over and over , I noticed ZERO difference. Finally with one remaining enemy as before, I hit him once, twice , three times :

    47, 48, 47.

    Same exact damage numbers as before. At this point I just turned the game off and haven't touched it since.

    So knowing all this , how is the "core" of the game OK?

  • OrcBeard92
    180 posts

    @fathyk Well, it's a tricky one without going into a long essay about game design as a whole, which I don't particularly want to do.

    You're mentioning the stats, which again really just goes into what I was saying as the game being unfinished. Which I agree with you on. Though in Odyssey, you still ended up juggling huge numbers which at max level, became kind of irrelevant anyway. Working out whether you can hit an enemy for 1,000,000 damage to assassinate him is kind of excessive after a while. Though I personally always ignored that min/max element of the game, and turn off damage indicators, because I don't really find that stuff engaging. Valhalla finally lets you basically play it how you wish to play, and actually has more freedom in that regard. You can target weak points, or just assassinate people. Odyssey you couldn't do that unless doing some mathematics, and filter through 9,000 pieces of purple gear and legendaries to tweak it. Valhalla is more accessible to the player, at least in this way.

    However, when I say core gameplay, I am referring to general design choices, and understanding why the devs may have picked them.

    The raven not being able to tag people, because they found it lessened attachment to the game world. Made things repetitive, where the player would just tag everything, ad infinitum. With a game as long as Valhalla is, I can see why they did it. Having the Odinsight, is personally a better alternative, and at least offers a more immersive alternative, thematically speaking anyway. Synin can actually tag patrols and treasure anyway, just in a less intrusive manner than painting it on your UI. I enjoy using the raven here because it's relaxing to just fly around and pay closer attention to the environment than before. You clearly don't,

    The combat for me is far more accessible, even if the animations may not be as 'fluid' as in Odyssey. I'm not tied into arbitrarily not being able to kill a guy, just because I went into a high level area. Valhalla lets you fight people wherever you go, even if they may be more challenging, I can still beat them. There is freedom. In Odyssyey, if I take one step over the border, a wolf is level 70, and 40 in the other, sometimes rendering them practically immortal. I find the attacks have more impact and weight to them, and the stamina limitations make you think more tactically in a fight. I like the darker, more violent nature of it, instead of the flashy golden spark explosions and so on that would appear in Odyssey. It might not look as flashy, but I've never had any issues. If anything, aside from missing a bit of variety in executions, I find it far more satisfying chaining from an attack, into a grapple, headbutts, and so on. It works.

    The lack of gear variety, I welcome it. The other games threw hundreds of pieces at you. To a new player, this is overwhelming. You end up changing out your cool sword for a new one every 10 mins. In Valhalla, they wanted you to feel attached to a weapon, and for each thing to have a story behind it. As a core theme, it works as intended. You don't like it however, so again, it is subjective.

    Transmog is tied to the village, because they wanted it to be the continuous gameplay cycle. You go out on a raid, saga, adventure, and come back. If it was tied to the UI, maybe players would never have a reason to go back? Now, I don't agree with this 100%, but from a design point of view, I get it. The devs have themes they wanted to convey in Valhalla, and they wanted to keep to that theory. Sometimes when you are making a game, it isn't always about carrying everything over verbatim from the past, sometimes they will want to put their own spin on it. Valhalla has tried to tie itself into its world a little better than just using video game logic. Again, I don't 100% like it, but I get it.

    The longship vs. Adrestia, personally I think both work equally well. A longship is not a fighting vessel, it is for transport mostly. A trireme is the opposite, purposely designed to smash things up. The longship, even down to the camera angle, is designed so that you feel more attached to your crew. Everyone on the ship is a character either in your village, or someone you have met. They all have stories. People sing when you go along the water. Odyssey had the shanties, but even if you had a quest NPC, how often did you ever really pay attention to someone after you recruited them? They became just another faceless avatar to stand on deck. The crew, too, are interchangeable skins in effect. The Adrestia had great sound design, and navigation was excellent, but the longship is a smaller scale, and you are supposed to feel more involved in it. You are very low to the water, you can see everything close up. The Adrestia on the other hand is huge, and you are crossing a huge world. The player is more removed from it, both in camera and in scale.

    In Valhalla, the devs weren't trying to tell the same story, or even in the same way. They wanted you to experience the world, and the water, in a different way to Odyssey. I think they both work perfectly fine.

    Again, I agree with you on 800's England not being the best environment for visual storytelling, whether parkour or exploration related, but I think what they've done with it is pretty faithful, and still interesting to move about. It's more Witcher than Assassin's Creed sometimes, but I enjoyed the darker tone, and the parkour and traversal is still satisfying enough to me. In Odyssey, you quickly became a bit of a superhero in that regard, even removing fall damage altogether after a while. In Valhalla, you are more immersed, and I think it is on par with something like Origins there. Even if there aren't the great cities and monuments, there is plenty to see and do, and real life places if you know what to look for. It is just more subtle, and less overblown.

    There are choices behind everything they have done. It is just whether you agree with it or not. They felt that Odyssey had explored the sea enough. Diving for shipwrecks and so on just doesn't lend itself too well to Valhalla's themes. There are a few here and there, but not on the same scale. Perhaps they could have added some more sea life such as dolphins, but European waters are not as diverse as the Aegean. (and even then, it doesn't have sharks of the same size as Odyssey does anyway). I saw a whale or two in Norway, and the seals are fine. Sometimes game designers are more interested in the suggestion of what is there, rather than illustrating everything. England wouldn't have had grey squirrels, which didn't arrive until the 1800's, all would have been red squirrels. There would even have been beavers in the rivers at that time. But these small details aside, what is there is enough to suggest the world is alive, and that is enough sometimes.

    Many of your points outside of the numbers game, boil down to personal taste. I find more enjoyment from not constantly worrying if I am doing the most damage, wearing the best gear, or have the shiniest weapon. You seem to be more worried about it. At present, some stats and runes in it work, others don't work as well. I wouldn't care about what some youtuber says either, and inform my own opinion on the game. Some people play games like these to make an OP character. I don't. I will purposely go out of my way to make it challenging for myself. I think Valhalla offers a lot of opportunity for that.

    What we have, at least, works for me. It just needs more polish. I think you just didn't enjoy the game, and that's fine. For me, I understand why it is the way it is. I don't need a youtuber to tell me that.

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @orcbeard92 fair enough, and a sincere thanks for taking time out to give such a detailed response.

    A common theme i see in your answers is that you prefer simpler action RPGs that don't everywhelm you with loot, numbers, stats, etc. I guess I get that, but I often wonder if you acknowledge that the current stat system is mostly meaningless and has minimal effect , why even have it?

    Honestly. Valhalla is dumbed down enough that I wouldn't even call it an RPG. There is no character profession, stats don't matter, and weapons are fixed in locations that never change. By end of the game, everyone will have the same exact Eivor as everyone else as far as stats.

    Also the cynical part of me is that they made the transmog system in one spot and costs money is not due to "immersion" but rather forcing most players to buy money packs with Helix credits. Changing all gear pieces at 50 coins a pop comes out out to about 400 coins. Not a small amount especially if you want to experiment with different looks.

    I strongly disagree with a lot of what you said, and that's ok. We can agree to disagree.





  • DuskDragon56496
    395 posts

    @fathyk Completely agree, Valhalla is simply bad by design and lacking in any creativity whatsoever.The game was built completely around mtx which unbelievably are still coming out in spite of the last pizz poor dlc being a month ago. The entire Valhalla game is nothing but repetition, find an ally, fight his enemies and win the fort.At least in Odyssey the order members put up a fight unlike this lemon where they practically just drop and die.There's just no story creativity in Valhalla, and the characters aren't even likable.Half the controls in the game are meaningless,the nudity filter for instance,whats the point, mommy and daddy ubi have already decided we're all too young for nudity!! Most of the game engages in wasting the players time to get that "lengthy" feel.Valhalla is a mess of uninspired nonsense under the guise of "spend more money for cool items to make it spectacular."It honestly couldn't be a decent sized pimple on the hind end of Odyssey. And wow are we all paying a premium price for this load of mediocrity! They say there will be another dlc for this mess, anyone want to wager that that dlc will be upwards of $40,remember this post, because given Ubisofts track record I'm guessing the next dlc will be at least that! I don't fault Ubisoft for trying to make money, but between the main game,crap dlc and all the mtx put together still aren't worth the $120 I paid!

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @duskdragon56496 i agree completely. I regret wasting 130 hours of my life playing this game. Its so boring and repetitive, and has the depth of a puddle . Im just made because I loved Origins and Odyssey so much and was excited that the Origins team was making valhalla. But what happened ? How could the talented team that made Origins make such a dull and shallow game as Valhalla ? I wish I was a fly on the wall during development. Something MUST have happened, where halfway thru development they had to do a complete 180 and rush a game out .

    Im worried that Ubisoft will incorrectly interpret valhallas amazing sales figures as fans liking the game so much, rather than the reality that all that is because of the fans Origins and Odyssey won over. I got valhalla despite my lack of interest in the setting because Origins and Valhalla are 2 of my favorite games ever. I guarantee you if Odyssey flopped then Valhalla would have too.




  • RCDeschene
    103 posts

    I agree with a good number of your points, but there are a few reasons why Valhalla turned-out the way it did that can be actually explained...

    - combat is Valhalla is notably slower, jankier, more disconnected, and much less smooth than Odyssey. What the heck happened ? Im doing a NG+ in Odyssey now and im dodging, rolling, parrying, attacking everyone and it flows like fine wine. The abilities in Odyssey are so so so much better and dont break the flow of rhe combat. Sparta kick, rain of arrows, ring of chaos, and so many more flow thru your combat rhythm so much better than in Valhalla . All of Valhallas abilities abruptly end thr flow of your attacks , many are exremely unbalanced and some very useless (are throw anyone?), and Eivors melee attacks are so awkward and slow and lack range or fluidity . Im just awkwardly spamming the light attack button over and over, often hitting empty air, and don't even bother with heavy attacks due to the completely unnecessary stamina system. What does that add exactly ? And why only a max of four adrenaline bars? Is the intention to make the combat as least enjoyable as possible?

    Most of the hardcore fanbase complained that the character in Odyssey was a demi-god with too many superpowers and not enough plausible humanistic skills.

    - the long ship. Aka your horse on water. Now granted I realize not everyone loved the Adrestia, but sailing the amazing Aegean sea , being alone in middle of vast ocean at night during a violent thunder storm , and slowly upgrading my ship with better parts and weapons and adding to my customizable crew and cosmetics was magical.

    It's because of the the Adrestia's mechanics is why most players soured-up towards naval play by the end of Odyssey. The bar for anything ship-oriented was set with Black Flag.

    - now this is subjective, but 800s England is to me the most boring setting for an open world possible. Vast, empty countryside and fields, an empty world with little vertical buildings to climb, very small scattering of town and the world jist feels dull and dark and dreary and repetitive. I didn't force them to pick the setting. They did.

    800's England is also the very era that all the iconic viking tropes come from, which is what this game is about. It historically wouldn't work anywhere else.

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @rcdeschene hey buddy thanks for taking the time out to respond!

    My comment about the combat isn't really about realism of the abilities, but just how combat and abilities feel in Valhalla. Its drastically jankier and more awkward and far less polished than in Odyssey. Everything from hit detection to animation to how abilities connect smoothly with melee strikes. Its jarring how much worse it is in Valhalla. Most of the time im hitting empty air with Eivor , and the combat loop consists of me constantly hitting the dash button to run after an enemy and wildly swing my light attack button and occasionally the very slow hard attack button, often hitting air while the opponent runs around me in circles.

    Abilities dont flow smoothly either. For example in Odyssey I can easily combo my melee attacks with a Sparta kick or a Ring of Chaos. Abilities were designed to seamlessly integrate within the combat flow. What ability can you do this with in Valhalla ? Axe throw? Valkyrie dive? The closest is the grab and kick ability but even that breaks the flow of combat with the awkward grab Eivor does before the kick.

    Abilites in Valhalla are meant to be used on thier own, not in the middle of and in conjunction with your melee attacks.

    The combat is just..... jankier. I felt it right away when I started Valhalla, but its even more noticeable now that I'm back playing Odyssey in glorious 60fps. It's a massive downgrade .

    In regards to the Adrestia , I think in thr entire game it only forces you into naval combat like 3 times. Outside of that you can literally play the entire game without fighting a single ship as you can easily just sail past any pirate ship, and Athenian and Spartan ships never attack unless you do. Frankly the whole thing about the Adrestia is over blown and is just a very vocal minority. Most people I know loved the sailing in Odyssey and thr freedom it gave you to truly become immersed in this massive world.






  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    Also what happened to the overpowered attacks for each weapon type and for arrows? What happened to horse combat? Why on earth would they make the charged attack an ability when it was working just fine in previous 2 games as a normal attack you just charge ?

    So many boneheaded decisions and cuts that are impossible for me to explain.

  • RCDeschene
    103 posts

    @fathyk But that was part of the complaint with the combat, it was too effortless at times, too button mashy. The main character of any Assassin's Creed isn't supposed to be a brawling warrior, but a stealthy assassin. Even the devs said that because of the high demand that they wanted to, keep open combat as a playstyle, but make stealth more preferable this time around.

    And sure, we didn't have that many main story naval missions in Odyssey, but we did have plenty of side quests and Ubisoft challenges involving it. It was a tedious nightmare for us grindy completionists.

  • Ashelsu
    49 posts

    @rcdeschene The main character of any Assassin's Creed isn't supposed to be a brawling warrior, but a stealthy assassin.
    But that is exactly what Eivor is, a warrior. Learning a couple of tricks doesn't make her an assassin. And what about those huge castle sieges with open fights? And considering how stealth works in the game, how little tools you have, how broken enemies AI is (sometimes they don't see you point blank, sometimes they see you from the other side of the fortress, sometimes a neaby animal can break your stealth) I found stealth to be more enjoyable in previous games.

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @rcdeschene im not sure I follow. If anything the combat in Valhalla is way more button mashy and far easier . Less to do = easier . Like I said in my other posts , in Valhalla all I do is constantly dash so I can get within spitting distance of enemies and mindlessly spam the light attack button and avoid strong attack to avoid annoying and pointless stamina drain. I rarely used any abilities because none are interesting or fun to use and break thr flow of combat due to how they are animated, and frankly because I'm so OP 8 I dont even feel need to use them. Just mash light attack and everything will die.

    Odyssey was FAR more involved and strategic. Its the opposite of Valhalla's combat which has the depth of a puddle . I reslly think you got completely backwards

    As for intentionally dumbing down combat and removing moves and abilities and making the combat jankier and less polished, all for the sake of making your character more "assasian" , that makes no sense at all either . Assasination in Valhalla is noticeably worse if anything, mainly due to no levels of being spotted like in Odyssey. In Valhalla if ANY enemy sees you, at any time, no matter where they are, then ALL enemies in thst same camp or area immediately make a bee line to you. In Odyssey if one guy spots you and you quietly and quickly kill him, other enemies out of range won't know you there . This is the primary reason I stopped bothering with assassination in Valhalla and I'd just barge in and stsrt spamming light attack until everything is dead





  • lemmie88
    289 posts
    In Valhalla if ANY enemy sees you, at any time, no matter where they are, then ALL enemies in thst same camp or area immediately make a bee line to you.

    lol, this is so true. And heaven forbid there's a wolf passing by who sees you. Because all the enemies suddenly develop wolf telepathy and know exactly where you are with their own magical animal vision. This big aggro behavior SHOULD be what the alarm bells do, but in effect, the alarm bells do nothing. Something is definitely broken.

    I agree that Valhalla is very disappointing in many ways when compared to Odyssey. But realize that they are made by different studios, Odyssey was made by Ubisoft Quebec and Valhalla by Ubisoft Montreal. It is not that they're taking away features, it is a different game altogether. It is much more enjoyable going in with less expectations. Most of Valhalla's faults are due to releasing an unfinished game. Personally, I think when Ubi decided to go all-in on their "live service" strategy, they just forced Valhalla out prematurely into a mold that didn't fit. So many things are just broken and they apparently have no incentive or expertise left to fix it.

    It would be a much shorter list to figure out what Valhalla does better. Music, for one. Cinematics/screenplay, for two. If you go back to Odyssey, you realize just how AWKWARD every dialogue exchange is. That's all I can think of. 😂 Aesthetics, maybe, but that's personal preference.

  • As1r0nimo
    345 posts

    @lemmie88 Idk, what are you playing, but in my game (max assassin), if an enemy detects me, only a few enemies become alerted. Something is very wrong with your game, or it's just a [censored].

  • CyCzarn
    45 posts

    @kfathy There are some things Odyssey does better sure, like transmog, the bird mechanic, and propers side quests. In my opinion the setting, story and combat are vastly superior in Valhalla.

  • lemmie88
    289 posts

    @as1r0nimo Sadly, I am playing ac valhalla and I agree there is something very wrong with it. Sometimes, even when hidden 50ft away, the baddies start engaging civilians and it somehow makes them know where I am (Picts at Elmet monastery, for example). Something messed up and convoluted with the aggro and detection.

  • Fathyk
    11 posts

    @cyczarn dang.... if someone put a gun to my head and forced me to pick just one thing I view as a massive step down from Odyssey out of the long list of things, I'd have to go with the combat .

    I can understand you prefering the story and setting as that is purely subjective, but the combat?

    In my opinion they're not even on the same planet. The combat in Valhalla is so janky and disjointed, the animation of both Eivors attacks and the enemy reaction to them, are so poorly done you would think you're playing an early build of a game engine. A perfect example of that is the stomp attack. Its so poorly animated and its hit detection so poor and the enemy reaction to it so janky im amazed that this is apparently the signature move replacing the Sparta kick .

    The abilities in Valhalla fall in the same boat. The Valkyrie dive is awkward to use, hard to aim correctly, and completely breaks the flow of combat, which is a common theme on all of Eivors abilities. Is there a single ability you can smoothly chain with your melee attacks like the Sparta kick or Ring of Chaos or Hero strike?

    Even the over hyped dual wielding is extrmely underwhelming. You basically get one new attack per weapon. That's it. Is that supposed to be better than the overpower attacks from Odyssey? Or enough to excuse the lack of horse combat?

    Even the kill animations are so much jankier and poorly animated than in Odyssey . They look so smooth and slick in Odyssey . Even the flourish the Alexios does at the end of them looks bad [censored]. And what's wrong with the blood in Valhalla? Why does it look so watered down and lacks the spraying and sprouting effects of Odyssey?

    Its just a laundry list of massive step downs. Maybe its because I just came off 130 hours from Valhalla and now playing a NG+ in Odyssey in amazing 60fps, but it immediately floored me just how much smoother and more fun the combat is in Odyssey. Right now I'm having a blast Sparta kicking enemies into walls or other enemies or off ledges, or lining up a group of enemies ans sending a loud and extemely powerful spectral bull rushing through them and sending them flying , and corralling them around me in a large group so I can send them flying with a fiery ring of chaos.

    Never mind the limitless amount of builds i created and saved into a slot I can switch to at any time. Its endless fun while in Valhalla I was bored stiff with the watered down, slow, shallow button mashy combat within the first 15 to 20 hours . Id actively avoid it because its so boring and unsatisfying




Suggested Topics