Welcome to discussions

Quick Suggestions

  • shaiwan43
    54 posts

    @patricia81994
    @Gloomseeker

    Everyone of course is free to like or dislike any game. I only point out that in the community there is simply overwhelming consensus on the Witcher 3 quality being very high. Can anyone show another AAA big-budget game in 2010-2020 with a Critic score of 93 and a Player score of 9.4? Probably not. Still, it doesn't mean you have to like it. Hot dogs are popular but doesn't mean you have to like them or eat them.

  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    @shaiwan43

    Absolutely true words!

    But when you like hot dogs you can argue if it is a good idea to replace the sausage in hot dogs with something like fish and keep calling it a hot dog. The same with Odyssey. It is a solid game on its own but really Ubisoft Quebec doesn't know what AC is. They should have just called it Odyssey or Odyssey: An Assassin's Creed Story to distance it from the main series.

    Odyssey brought a lot of new players to the AC franchise but those players are clearly more into full RPG games and this shows when you look at Valhalla reviews from people who loved Odyssey and Valhalla revievs from people who played every AC.

    I really hope that the next game will go back to let us play a fully developed assassin who joins the order at the start and finally a character who actually gets ingame training in parcour. Strangely even Ezio could parcour like a master from the start of AC2. The RPG mechanics and bulletspunge enemies should be decreased to five us a more stylish combat system. Maybe they could finally try and mimic the Batman Arkham combat properly because this combat style fits those games better than the Dark Souls hitbox based system.

    Ubisoft should really copy a lot from Ghost of Tsushima as well. The combat of this game looks very stylish too and could fit in an AC game. Ubisoft has a lot of talented world designers and writers like Darby McDevit but sadly a bad combat design team. They should make Darby McDevitt the lead writer of every AC game and bring back some people from the Unity parcour team (in Unity they had an external parcour coordinator, that's they reason why Unity has all those fancy parcour animations). The combat design team should be changed from the current team should work more on games like Immortals and other full on RPG's.

  • kreutzgang
    635 posts

    @yesin069 lots of us have played a lot of if not all AC games and still think Odyssey was better than Valhalla, so far at least.

  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    @kreutzgang

    I understand that. Maybe it is better in things like RPG mechanics and looting stuff. But nobody can say that it fullfilled the things that AC players want. Except modern day, there are simply no assassins and even basic things like the leap of faith don't fit well in Odyssey because the setting is just too way back.

    They wanted to make a fancy Leonidas 300 game and they could have done that with another franchise. All the Kassandra would have been better done in flashback scenes in a proper AC game with a fitting setting if they really insisted on putting those lore beats in a game. Playable flashback scenes with Darius or Aya killing Kleopatra would have pleased die-hard AC fans more than the whole Odyssey game.

  • kreutzgang
    635 posts

    @yesin069 Valhalla doesn't have assassinations or any point to stealth either. It's easier to play a sneaky character overall in Odyssey, or an archer for that matter than in Valhalla, where you excel at everything so there's no point in trying to hide ... All it does better is adding grindy stuff and timed platform jumping, which has little to do with assassins 😄

    Eg I built an assassin type in Odyssey with 2 daggers and he's squishy as hell and even on NG+ dies if I don't pay attention for a sec. In Valhalla I went raven, but now I have all trees and can steam roll everything with a bow and with 2-H melee weapons. I totally suck with a bow in Odyssey as my specs are in the assassin tree mainly.

  • damonmath
    2 posts

    Loved Odyssey and have spent hundreds of hours playing (100%) and re-playing just to get all variations of the Atlantis gear. Below I listed the Pros of Odyssey and the Cons of Valhalla.

    Odyssey Pros

    • Mythical Creatures (3 types of Cyclops, Medusa, Hades, Minotaur, etc...)
    • Loot/gear drops that can be traded for money (wall runs)
    • Build outs!!!
    • Legendary weapons/armor
    • Ship battles
    • The arena
    • Melee and abilities (Ares Madness for the OP win)
    • Atlantis
    • Having to sail between islands
    • The tribal feel of people from place to place
    • Never thought I'd say this, but the "?" marks littered throughout the world
    • Fire/Poisonous weapons


    Valhalla Cons

    • Standing Stones
    • Anomalies
    • Stone Stacking
    • Flyting (why?)
    • Cursed Symbols
    • The Mushroom Trips
    • The tattoo (sea shanty) parkour
    • No need to ever use the boats (horse with abilities is just as good or better)
    • Way too many "tiny" treasure chests
    • Lack of paper for upgrading (paper?)
    • Weak abilities
    • Not enough legendary weapons
    • The Flag carrying guards (just dumb to have to dodge attack them or harpoon them out of the way)


    I think for me the game became way too boring around 13% completion. The story was done, the order was just about done, and all that was left to do was to pick off dots from the map or Google what cool stuff might be left to do. After finding Excalibur I thought the other weapons might be fun, but... besides the occasional on fire parry from the axe, it was all down hill from there. I never switched bow and arrows from the hunting bow as it seemed to one hit anything without much effort. Even shooting through walls was disappointing as you couldn't unblock doors with it (???).

    The things I felt were good, there weren't enough or any of really. The Drengr fights were cool, and those 3 witches could have easily been 3 per region instead of 3 total for the whole game. My most challenging fight was the Steinnbjorn and even he was no where near as difficult as Cerberus from Odyssey.

    I probably won't purchase the DLC for this installment and plan to save up for Horizon Forbidden West.



  • kreutzgang
    635 posts

    @damonmath for me, oddly, the first (easiest) witch was the hardest enemy in the game. I steam-rolled the Jotunheim bear and the other witches long before I managed to take her out ... weird I know.

    Agree with pretty much all you said except I like Flyting, while I can see why people might not, it was at least original with only a few in the game and not 1000's, plus not really hard to solve (even if you have to google it, it can easily be done unlike some of the other crap). It also yielded a reward other than skill points or nothing. I hated the drinking games, which along with the stones and the anomalies are examples of things which - at least after a certain level of difficulty - google won't help anymore). The cursed symbols feel like they were meant to be part of some proper narrative, but just get *really* tedious after a while. The shroom trips I liked - at first. Then they got repetitive and half-[censored] (kill x enemies and always the same ones too, and at least one was super convoluted to "solve"). The standing stones again, I liked, although they are a tad glitchy (though I also felt there were a touch too many of them - 3 would have been fine), I also thought the stone stacking was okay until the last few (why not stop them after the memories run out?), same for the anomalies - at some point I just quit doing them because jumping across moving platforms avoiding dumb beams isn't why I play AC. There is just way too much stuff like that in the game, even to the point of forcing you to look for the secret entrance to get almost every single low level chest containing leather and iron, which you can get by massacring animals and hitting rocks anyway. It's just not fun unless you are doing a main story playthrough and only bother with a handful of extra stuff. Also, the fishing hut and hunting missions are terrible, pointless grind.

    And though I moan a lot, I did actually like the game a lot, well the main story, the combat (although it gets too easy and the skill tree is .... weird), and some of the other stuff, if there had been a lot less of most of it.

  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    I understand your point of view but i really would love to see AC getting back being more traditional and trying to be more realistic. I don't need this game to be challenging or to have any mythological stuff. Back in the day AC tried to explain all mythological happenings with technology. In Origins they started slow with one giant snake in an hallucination and in Odyssey they simply gone too far. Even Valhalla has too much of this stuff. One hallucination dream would be enough in an AC game. No need in fighting giant legendary creatures and monsters over and over again which kill the atmosphere of those games.

    Also stuff like fire and poison weapons annoy me in modern AC games to be honest. I simply don't use them because the effect of fire and poison jst destroys the whole image. That is why i would prefer a stylish combat system more. I want to be a badass assassin who kills from the shadows and runs away but when in combat, he shows all of his fancy moves.

    The big problem in Valhalla with stealth for me is the buggy AI detection. Even on the lowest difficulty they spot you too soon. And Ubisoft tries too hard to always sell us the setting instead of letting us play an assassin in different settings. #LikeAViking instead of #LikeAnAssassin!
    I always try to play my character in AC like the story leads him. In Black Flag i played like a pirate until the point where Edward started changing his mind and leaned more into becoming an assassin. In Valhalla i am playing like a viking but as soon as the Hidden Ones teached me some stuff i tried using it too. Hopefully Eivor will join them at some point and then i will change to fully play an assassin (i am still early in the game - please don't spoil things!). I don't care for the skill tree and the abilities. I just try to enjoy the game because of the setting and the story and lore. I also play at hardest difficulty and with the non-upgraded starting armor. I simply don't care for all the abilities and fancy valkyrie jumps. They are not even on my ability tree. The game is easy enough, but i always try to look badass and realistic in combat.

    I don't care for builds or stuff like that. AC isn't Dark Souls and i don't want bullet spunge enemies. Faster time to kill and one-hit-assassinations are the right steps in my eye. The decreased loot is also very good because i always prefered the starting armor in every AC and then the last master assassin outfits. No need in finding new loot that does +5% more damage every 5 minutes.

    I love fantasy games and medieval games but i always loved AC as well for it's unique way in trying to explain all those crazy stories with technology from the Isu. Like the original AC creator said, AC is more Sci-Fi than Fantasy!

    I also love RPG's but i really don't think that full on RPG mode fits AC games. Ubisoft just uses those RPG mechanics to make the games grindy and to sell XP boosts and new armors every other week.


  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    @gloomseeker

    True words! I really would have loved if they build on Unity instead of throwing everything away that they achieved there and downgraded a lot of stuff. I don't even think that the next-gen exlusive AC will look as good as Unity, simply because they insist in making bigger worlds.

    But a positive thing is that Ubisoft Montreal at leats tries to bring stuff like social stealth back. Now bring us the assassins back and parcour and i will be more happy. No need to go back to the old system and have all the new fans against them. I think they already lost a lot of their old AC fanbase, as you can see on YouTube for instance. The old AC YouTubers (like LazerzZ and Tynamite) did such deep content and lore stuff. The new ones (like JorRaptor) just do build videos, new Helix Store stuff videos, where to find this and this weapon videos and complain on how Ubisoft could make fall damage a thing after Odyssey. Not to forget every video that is 8 Minutes long to maximise moneyyyyyy on Youtube, even if they just have 2 minutes of useful content in their videos. In Origins and Odyssey every video was 10 minutes long but Youtube changed some stuff to 8 minutes.Those people adapt really fast.

    Ubisoft should never get rid of fall damage in AC but they should try to make parcour better so you don't want to make some coffee while you climb down.

  • Mr.Dastone
    14 posts

    I Agree Odyssey is WAY better in all aspects of a Game. Combat is 3 steps back with Valhalla, But here is the thing. Valhalla sold better, so I HOPE, they realize because people were looking for another Odyssey, and not because Valhalla was better.

    I personal think Valhalla is not worth a AAA title and a bad game in general, while Odyssey is one of my all time favorites

  • OHH_KAY
    6 posts

    haha nailed it, having Shield matic 10/10 Viking matic 10/10, Norse Myth 10/10 , Greek Myth? no you donkey 0/10,no refund of course

  • OHH_KAY
    6 posts

    @gloomseeker yes it did, Eivor used the Hidden blade while in combat, heck you might want to rewatch the trailer bruh its 5/7

  • kreutzgang
    635 posts

    @mr-dastone I've said this before, but whether we like it or not, the general consensus among people who don't frequent forums seems to be that they love Valhalla.

  • ImaginaryRuins
    418 posts

    @kreutzgang Usually, when people like something, they don't bother to tell it to others, BUT when they hate something, they tend to warn others hoping that this can make the wrongdoers pay for it. This is something related to psychology which I very briefly learnt about years ago. So yes.

    The thing is, some users in the forum do not even seem to want to see others enjoying the game, as if it is wrong of others to like Valhalla. These forum users are simply obsessed with their complaints even if they hate the game. They keep playing but keep complaining.

  • kreutzgang
    635 posts

    @imaginaryruins I know, this is why forums tend to be heavy with moaners, because your average player couldn't be bothered to seek them (the forums) out. They tend to attract the more nerdy types that are more critical and more vocal. I'm also in a very big AC group on Facebook (a German one) and the amount of people there who are dissatisfied with Valhalla on even a minimal level is very low; this makes me feel we are kind of wasting our time, although there are aspects of the game that seriously need some attention.

    As for moaning, it can sometimes come across like that. I'm sure I sound like a super moaner. I did actually really enjoy the core content of the game, but I'm quite frustrated with some of it, in particular that it seems to have entirely ignored progress made in Odyssey, as well as not being able to play as an assassin without it feeling artificial. Some aspects, which superficially seem "harder" aren't even. The non regen of health, for instance, makes Valhalla actually easier once you levelled up the rations, and even the Odin's sight for enemies I find ultimately easier than the bird we had previously, because you can (re)use it while in combat. Ofc 80% of the time you end up booby trapping some corpse instead, but that's a different matter lmao. It's not even because I dislike being able to steam roll everything like a Viking, or playing catch the boulder with butch guys - haha - it's just in an AC game I feel I should be an assassin. It's the antagonist that's the assassin really, I guess though, so it's not like they completely axed the concept, and maybe that's just the wrong way of looking at it: you are more an outside observer than an assassin per se.

  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    @gloomseeker

    I think social stealth and parcour were on their peak with Unity. Social stealth just felt natural because there always were many people and you could just walk in them to hide. In Valhalla you always need to press a button to hide which lets the system feel very tagged on and not fluid.

    Things like not being able to fight with the hood and cloak on also annoy me in valhalla. Why the hell Eivor always takes off his hood when combat starts? Just let the player decide how they want to look!

    And don't let me start talking about the cloak physics...
    I really like the idea of a cloak and it looks badass but what are those PS3-like cloth physics. I played Ghost of Thushima on the PS5 of a friend and they simply nailed cloak physics.

    Look and learn Ubisoft:


  • sblantipodi
    Original poster 9 posts
    As title.
    I feel that Valhalla is way worse than Odyssey in pretty everything.

    Landscapes are all the same, ok we are talking about an historical period where there are only countryside,
    but what about Asgard?

    Asgard is so "lifeless" when compared to the Atlantis of Odyssey.

    Combat system is so boring when compared to Odyssey,
    ax, perry, ax, repeat.

    Skill tree is a caos, abilities can't be mixed in a combo like in Odyssey and you end using always the same abilities.
    I used one or two at most during combat.

    Too much things on the map, it happen that you spend 30 minutes finding a point on the map and you end finding some pieces of nichel, seriously?
    30 minutes for some nichel?

    Differently from Odyssey you don't feel the character progression.
    There are so few armour set, so few weapons, and you don't feel the character progression.

    I'm an AC fanboy, I played all the games launch day since the first AC but this game is so flat when compared to Odyssey and a big disappointment for me.







    I'm at 60 hours now and I changed my mind since the original post.

    Valhalla is not on par with Odyssey, Odyssey landscapes are way better, I like the history in Odyssey (that is absent in Valhalla), Valhalla have no "Historical Figures" like in Odyssey but all in all is a good game.
    I'm enjoying it, after the first hours, the gameplay is improved with skills and abilities, I think that if you liked Odyssey, you should play Valhalla.

  • Patricia81994
    113 posts
    As title.
    I feel that Valhalla is way worse than Odyssey in pretty everything.

    Landscapes are all the same, ok we are talking about an historical period where there are only countryside,
    but what about Asgard?

    Asgard is so "lifeless" when compared to the Atlantis of Odyssey.

    Combat system is so boring when compared to Odyssey,
    ax, perry, ax, repeat.

    Skill tree is a caos, abilities can't be mixed in a combo like in Odyssey and you end using always the same abilities.
    I used one or two at most during combat.

    Too much things on the map, it happen that you spend 30 minutes finding a point on the map and you end finding some pieces of nichel, seriously?
    30 minutes for some nichel?

    Differently from Odyssey you don't feel the character progression.
    There are so few armour set, so few weapons, and you don't feel the character progression.

    I'm an AC fanboy, I played all the games launch day since the first AC but this game is so flat when compared to Odyssey and a big disappointment for me.







    I'm at 60 hours now and I changed my mind since the original post.

    Valhalla is not on par with Odyssey, Odyssey landscapes are way better, I like the history in Odyssey (that is absent in Valhalla), Valhalla have no "Historical Figures" like in Odyssey but all in all is a good game.
    I'm enjoying it, after the first hours, the gameplay is improved with skills and abilities, I think that if you liked Odyssey, you should play Valhalla.


    Really ... did they pay you to write this. 😜

    I still think that Valhalla is way worse then Odyssey and i cannot be bought. 😏

  • Yesin069
    554 posts

    From a technical standpoint Valhalla didn't improve much. Textures and character detail are just a little better. All in all it is still the same engine. They just added motion blur, snow tesselation and improved NPC character detail. Sadly they mostly disabled the camera angles when in dialogue with an NPC in world events for instance.They gone back to the system in Origins where you talk to someone and the camera just stays at the same angle with you being able to spin it around.

    Some people say Odyssey looks better but i think this comes from the setting. Greece also looks more beautiful on pictures (when compared to England).

    This is also why i still find Black Flag looks decent (even today). The Caribian seas are a beautiful place. Colour grading for settings like Greece let's games just look better.

    I find Valhalla shows Enland off pretty well. I like beautiful settings like Greece but i also love medieval european settings which look much darker. I also love norway and snowy places.

    Still i wouldn't say Valhalla is "way worse" or Odyssey is "way worse". They are just different in gameplay and art style. Technology is mostly the same and Valhalla runs worse. But all in all i prefer Valhalla when i summarize all pros and cons of both games.

  • Max18400
    405 posts

    Technically it's a step back from odyssey. I play on console and personally didn't have any issues. With valhalla I've had some of the worst bugs that everyone has, not to mention the horrific yule bugs.
    Story wise I feel odyssey is for the most part better. Some bits of valhalla are great. Other bits not so much. From a historical standpoint, odyssey ends on at a (reasonable) conclusive event. Battle of amphiloplis brought in the end of the first phase of the peloponnesian was (yes it would be broken but there was peace for a few years). Valhalla's historical ending finishes exactly before a HUGE historical event happens that would have changed the face of power in England. Vahalla literally ends at such a flat point.
    Vahalla is a meh came. It's the first assassin's creed I've not enjoyed a few months after launch. I'm hoping (optimistically) that river raids saves the game as right now its disappointing

Suggested Topics

Community Details

52
Online
194.5k
Users
32.9k
Topics
164.4k
Posts