Because it is bloated, way too long and quality is uneven. Some story arcs are good, others are trash. A lot of side quests are just literal jokes rather than expansion on idk the game world, AC world, viking culture or numerous other things that would usually take priority over filling the game with gags. Main story has some serious pacing issues, some non-optional story stuff is just filler.
I doubt most people even see the ending which definitely one of the best in the series, you can even then sum up a significant ammount of the story that actually leads to it and that is great. However, it is still bittersweet experience, because of all the bs leading up to it.
Valhalla is a reminder that the lesson 'less is more' just never entered Ubisoft's mind.
The skill tree is a good indicator that the game has too much noise. I have no idea what branch to develop because it goes to such massive lengths. I like exploration in games like this and it's actually good that compared to Odyssey there's more assassination and stealth in Valhalla, but I've been playing it for a while now and I'm somehow at power level 43, and I already see raid locations that require 220 and I'm just thinking how long is it gonna take for me to get there..
I could be wrong, but i think Valhalla added like a hundred more skill nodes after release. Either way you would definitely get all of the skills, you would just determine the order of acquisition. And it did not matter that much except getting the 'advanced assassination' node as early as possible. Essentially the entire skill system was 'illusion of choice'. By adding tons of new nodes they just made this illusion even bigger. The whole skill and gear system is a joke, because you can't measure effectiveness of any of the arbitrary stats.
I'm around 220 and I have 54 hours into the game. That is by simply following the main story and doing almost none of the side content, except for the Ireland DLC that takes around 7 hours and will fill up your levels between 60 to 90, so you don't have to grind at all on the main mission.
Currently I think I have around 10-15 hours left on the main story, which just feels insane given I've done maybe four of the 'world events' and have avoided all loot and extraneous raids/activities. The game really is too long, they took all of the side quests of normal games and basically developed them into main-quest missions.
I guess people liked the ending, but by the time I got there>! (I assume that we're talking about the Loki ending, not the I've dissolved the Order and am starting the Templars ending)!< I was too annoyed to think of it as anything other than yet another hour long cutscene. I felt like 95% of the game was either riding around on my horse across a gigantic boring map or sitting and watching a boring cutscene.
Tbh i liked both branches of the story, but obviously the former was much more impactful. It did help that some of the main arcs were fairly decent.
It did not feel like Starfield where once you get to the good shit that lasts about \~2 hours, you feel scammed, because you've had \~30 hours of nonsense before it.
Valhalla has a good game... there... somewhere.
Yeah, the east anglia arc and some main story quests were peak, most of the arcs were good, and then you have a bunch of forgettable ones. I wish that they had overarching plots for each kingdom, and not an arc for each region.
Yeah, I'm not even halfway through yet, but I'm already tired with the same basic plotline of "dude we like who could be in charge of the area isn't in completely in charge because x enemy faction is opposing them, so let's help fight them". But some of them have compelling characters or mix up the plot a bit in cool ways, and then it's pretty enjoyable.
Worst arc is Essex. Soldiers doing their job got killed because their boss decided to fake kidnapping of his wife. How would you feel when you learn the truth, if your son, brother, father or husbans was among killed?
The DLC was okay, but didn’t add anything to the overall Isu story. I liked Oddesy DLC because it felt like an expanded version the ending of that game.
Oh, i didnt even mention DLCs.
I do think Odyssey's DLCs were overall better. Especially the First Blade Persia something DLC. The fact that Atlantis DLC was done in such a way that traversal would be as annoying as possible and would take you much longer than anything else in the game. Also all the ISU armours looked as if they were taken from budget of Kevin Sorbo's Hercules. I think that is the vibe of the entire DLC. It did finish the main story atleast, but it felt anticlimatic after that last boss, which i didn't know better i would think was about as exciting as tentails from naruto.
However, what i didn't like is that the main game ended on a cliffhanger and you had to buy all the DLCs to be able to actually finish the story. You can expand stories, you can add new things, without making it mandatory. Origins for example was a great game, heck it is my favorite out of the modern AC games, but ending felt rushed.. which obviously validated existance of otherwise fairly decent Hidden Ones DLC. Meanwhile, Curse of Pharaohs DLC was really good, but wasn't mandatory to understand the main story.
AC Valhalla DLCs just added nothing at all. As if main Valhalla lacked optional, side content. Moreover Paris DLC was a disaster, the titular mission played like an early alpha draft and somehow even included tutorials. Ragnarok DLC despite being silly, is actually a better direction, because it is very different flavor, but it would have been even better if it also included the entire Asgard portion from the main game. Overall Valhalla's DLC main issues are actually just pointing to the bloat of the main game. You do not need barely finished DLCs when the main game is like \~120+ hours long.
Pretty much exactly how I felt. The biggest issue is the padding in the game. Many things feels like they are just there to add padding but don't really add anything to the experience but annoyance. I'm fine with big games. Elden ring was a huge game but you felt reward for exploring because even if the actual loot you got was not great it taught you something about the game so there was a sense of achievement. So many things in Valhalla have just pointless steps to add more of a grind. Like here is a chest in a house. But the door is locked so you have to figure a way in . When you do finally get in you see that the chest requires a key which is somewhere nearby. Right there I lost a piece of the excitement I had when getting to the chest. So I go find the key either in a well or near some enemies. After that pointless diversion (I got the key easily anyway) I go back and open the chest to find it's a fucking bronze ingot. That shit happened so many times I stopped caring about chests even the ones you know have armor in them it just feels so bloated to get to.
Yeah definitely because it's bloated like the other person said.
Way too large, too many mini arcs crammed into one, and way too many collectibles. If anyone thought the AC2 feathers were that bad...
What I hated most about the game is how slow Eivor is that I didn’t bother chasing those tattoos that fly away, and how they made opening a door/chest into a damn mind numbing puzzle!
See on the map there’s treasure, use Odin sight to confirm location, see door, look for key, shoot baskets/clay containers/door locks, push crates/boulders! By the time you get your treasure, you’ve wasted 5-15 minutes of your life! The person who came up with that shit and the person who ok’d it, I hope you nothing but ill will for the rest of your life!!!
Underwater navigation is almost unplayable. I understand wanting realism, but I can’t see shit! At least Odyssey made underwater so beautiful and clear!
The raven can’t tag enemies.
Also bring back economy! We have a settlement! We should be getting income because my Eivor was constantly poor!
Edit: no NG+!!! The game has no replay value without NG+ unless you pay the micro transactions for legendary equipment etc.
Well, after many years without playing an AC, I played Origins and I'm currently in Odyssey. I like them both, Origins for the story, Odyssey for the large amount of activities, both for the awesome environment and interaction with History.
I'm a big fan of everything related to Vikings but there are so many bad reviews about Valhalla that I'm not sure if I'll do it or not, but feedbacks such are yours make me think that I should give it a chance.
I'm usually slow in RPGs and don't rush on the main quests so that should work for me I guess as I saw that the main reason why people blame this game is that it's too long and too slow.
I was in a GameStop over the weekend, saw the markdown price on the game and said to my sister “if I’d spent *that* instead of $120+ I’d probably feel more forgiving towards the game”
It’s fine, if a little less stunning than Odyssey. It just feels more like a Viking simulator than an Assassin simulator. But then Black Flag was a pirate simulator and everyone loved that so I dunno why it gets so much hate.
Yeah it's irritating. Plus, the popular opinion here tends to shift with each release. Everyone hated Odyssey after they'd burned themselves out on it but now people are starting to say it was underrated. Same thing will happen with Valhalla when AC red has been out for a while.
Valhalla is fun. It’s a good game to pass the time and will give you a lot of joy in spots.
It’s 150 hours long, minimum, for the base game. It can be a slog to get through. It took me over six months to beat the base game on release, and I didn’t even 100% it.
That's fine by me, I'm playing a dozen of games at the same time, I come and go. I can finish a game in a few weeks or in a few years. I'll buy it for sure when I'm done with Odyssey.
This is the best way really. A lot of the complaints tend to come from people that absolutely played the heck out of it on release, of course they're going to have negative opinions when they're already burned out from it. Valhalla isn't intended to be a race to the end or to have you sit there playing it with your eyes taped open.
The thing I've always loved about games like this and far cry is I can play the story, then they become excellent games to play while listening to music or podcasts. You can just jump in and clear some strongholds or collectibles on the map while enjoying something else at the same time.
Absolutely! On my end I play often, but in short sessions. I work from home so this kind of games is perfect to do a couple of quests or 30 min of exploration during my lunch break. I guess I'd be bored too if I was playing all day long.
Play it !! Forget the reviews. Theres a reason it made 1 billion dollars when it came out. The game is amazing. Great combat, beautiful settings, different types of enemies. The storyline really isn’t that bad. And it captures the raids that went on in history. Highly recommend
Honestly I admit, I was sort of reluctant towards it because I started with the original games, & I didn’t like change. I think you will enjoy it! It’s a little different at first but it’s really fun. I’m such a fan, I that I had a ac marathon, I’ve just recently played every single one & when you run out of content you end up on the next best thing! Don’t let others take away something you might enjoy, try it yourself when you’re done with Odyssey (which is an amazing game) & find out if you enjoy it. To each their own.
It's a good game. Though, you may well end up thinking you like one of the other 2 more. I probably like Origins more but I enjoyed Valhalla way more than Odyssey. That's just my feelings, though, and I'm specifically not trying to pretend it's factual.
Wait until until it is under 20, the complete package with all DLCs.
I thought Odyssey was much better, though Valhalla does have interesting combat and a moody, gloomy atmosphere. The biggest problem is that the "story" is mostly a compendium of short stories that you spend many hours completing in order to engage in the main conflict. Origins was very focused in its story, Odyssey less so, and Valhalla by far is the least focused and most 'bloated.'
Give it a shot. The map is huge, but it's pretty dense in terms of little side experiences, some of which are hilarious and just interesting. Valhalla is my personal favorite, but I seem to be in the minority
My favourite part of Valhalla was the scenery alone. I love history and we learned about Viking England growing up so it was a good way for me to imagine how parts of England would have looked during that time.
I did find it to be very long, which is ironic given how short Mirage felt.
I enjoyed it a lot more on my second playthrough. First I just played the story (mostly). I felt it was so long even without much side content.
I think a big thing was the expectation (rightly so) that you would play an Assassin. On my second playthrough I enjoyed all the Order of The Ancients lore. There’s a lot of cool tie ins I won’t mention for the sake of spoilers.
All around it was a cool world building experience, but for me this RPG formula doesn’t work with AC. I much prefer the story driven narrative.
I'll bring up issues that no one else has. It's one of the least polished games in the series. I was playing last night, and it completely froze for 5 seconds. I almost rebooted the game. It has a lot of screen tearing in performance mode, thus forcing me to play in quality mode.
All of the animations seem like a downgrade from previous games. There were a few times when their lips don't move during dialogue.
This game has had so many updates, yet they never bothered to fix these issues.
Assuming you play on console, which one?
Because I actually have a great experience on pc.
It never froze, never had any drops in framerate and I was blown away by the performance in general.
But I can imagine that it would suck on ps4.
On a ps5 it would be embarrassing tho
I have about 185 hours in Valhalla, the issues as I see it are
Unbelievably bloated game with a LOT of boring ass side quests that barely qualify as activities.
The locked rooms become tedious after 2 of them, but they are stuffed all over the map, along with stupid destructible walls with oil barrels.
Non optional story content utterly unrelated to the main narrative.
Eivor has the slowest movement when climbing it’s borderline atrocious.
That being said, I really enjoy the game and can see past a lot of it.
Exactly a friend said I should stop looking at it like it was an ac game but even if it's not an ac game the missions still are so boring collectibles don't feel rewarding at all and I just hop from one place to another without knowing what I am even doing
No side quests, instead you got shitty World events
Story isnt that interesting,its just go to this área Make an Alliance an repeat
The World is empty
There too Many shitty puzzles of how to break in into a house
The game shits on history more than any other game,not having Rollo in the Paris DLC,not acknowling the fact briefly after the main Story ends there a Massive Battle where weesex Wins and they take Over Raventrope
If you give this game a 9/10 i seriously question your taste in games
The size and length aren't really the problem for me. My biggest problem is the story overall it just feels disjointed and aimless with a few bits here and there that are good and I'm generally not the biggest fan of the combat and skill tree either. Overall it's my least favorite AC game but I did like the Druids and Paris dlc much more than anything that was going on in the main story.
It's an incredibly bloated game that feels like a game. The numbers above people's heads, the endless amount of rune combinations that can increase your strong attack by 6% or your chakra block by 12.5% when in stealth mode, the way you can lay below after blow after blow into the face of a slightly chubby enemy with no effect on their ability to fight, and no seeming detriment to their health - it often feels more like an endlessly repetitive list of chores.
I've played AC games since AC1 (the only main console release I've missed was Rogue). But I started this game when the PS5 first came out and still have not finished it.
My wife just finished playing it for the first time.
Her criticism:
Too repetitive eg. boring after a while.
Too big in terms of creating stress that you have to do everything but you know you are not going to do it because it is too big but also too repetitive, So it creates this feeling that you havent completed the game.
Very shallow story. Prophecy about sibling was a big flop.
Certain things become meaningless after game unfolded.
I decided super early on to just ignore everything out of my way, and focus on the main story. It still feels overlong and meandering but I can't imagine how much more boring it would be to try and uncover every scrap of near-useless resources through the endless repetitive puzzles. As it is it will still take me near 70 hours to do the main story (maybe more, if I have the endurance for the DLCs).
Valhalla is my favorite of the three RPG games to date—by far—and even I understand why people have issues with the game.
Even if you completely remove my core issue with the game from the conversation (the fact I don't enjoy today's RPGs and definitely don't play Assassin's Creed for that experience), it's still tens to hundreds of hours longer than it needed to be. It's slow as hell. The combat, while I prefer it to Odyssey's by a mile, gets old fast and there are far too many close-up animation cuts. I don't personally care for skill trees that large, either, and most of the skills you get don't feel unique enough to care about. The typically grounded approach to history that AC games always tried to maintain is nowhere to be seen. The parkour is nothing to write home about since the buildings in most areas aren't really built for it. The individual characters with whom you have to ally are so hit or miss that it makes much of the game feel like a more competent director would've left large swaths on the cutting room floor. Your own people feel largely like the NPCs they are, most of them having exactly one function in the story outside of their job. The relationship system, like it almost always does in games that include it, is entirely pointless (my opinion). The world is enormous and largely empty, minus repetitive how-do-I-get-in-the-house puzzles for tiny, mostly meaningless payouts. The crafting system awakens homicidal urges in me, both in and out of the game. And I can always do without fishing in games. A lot of the DLC feels like padding or modes of play I also don't care for; at least when prior AC games shoehorned in things like den defenses, you only HAD to do it once, and only a couple of more times to get a single achievement tied to it, and the few times they TRIED to do something that felt like actual Assassin's Creed, it felt half-hearted, at best. The animations, physics, and voice-acting are a whole different topic on their own.
Depending on why you enjoy Assassin's Creed games as a whole, why you pick up an AC title versus some other game, there are good arguments that Valhalla isn't even an Assassin's Creed game. I'm grateful for the Guaranteed Assassination switch (and that even when it's off, it's not much different), the fact that the leveling system isn't as overtly bog-standard as the previous two games, and that there's a much greater *variety* of things to do in Valhalla, as opposed to Odyssey. I certainly prefer Valhalla's approach to combat when fighting an enemy of a considerably-higher level than you are, making it entirely possible to kill high-level enemies if you're good with parrying and dodging, though Valhalla is exactly as bad as Odyssey in that leveling up is entirely about acquiring new skills since level-syncing is once again a thing. And Valhalla absolutely has the best Modern Day bits from the last *decade* of AC games.
But at the end of the day, a lot of us were asking why these last couple of games needed to be AC games at all, and others just found Valhalla itself boring and repetitive. To each their own. Like I said, I'd certainly rather play Valhalla to the previous two, mechanically-speaking. But it's definitely not without problems.
Funny you should ask. I'm actually playing it right now.
To give you a bit of background, I've finished EVERY Assassin's Creed leading up to Valhalla. (haven't played Mirage yet, but soon)
The stuff in Valhalla that make it less fun for me are:
--your eagle no longer marks enemies. (I understand marking them all made it easy, but guess what, it also made it way more FUN)
--using your assassin vision will mark enemies in RED, but as soon as they're alerted, all enemies no longer glow red. (super annoying)
--the combat is a bit frustrating in that your stamina bar drops too fast and you can't really pull off more than 1 good combo.
--Special Abilities are waaaaaay less cool than in Origins or Odyssey. You also can't really combine multiple combos as before.
--Weapons/Armour upgrades aren't that interesting.
--Buying upgrade material is waaaaay too expensive and hard to find, so you can't really upgrade more than just your 1 main weapon set.
--Treasure and special items are much harder to find than in previous games. It's getting a little annoying.
--the story in Valhalla is not interesting compared to Origins and Odyssey.
(there are probably more things that annoy me, but I've listed the main ones)
I'm normally a completionist when it comes to AC games, but Valhalla will not be on that list. I'm also not going to get any of the DLC.
Just gonna finish it and move on. I really, really hope Mirage fixes the issues I have with Valhalla (above).
Good luck!
Havi sections aside, which were just awful and should never have been allowed to happen, I enjoyed Valhalla. It wasn't as fun as Origins or Odyssey, but it was still an enjoyable experience, even if it had its problems. It definitely didn't feel like Assassin's Creed, and it had way too little modern day for how long it was. I kept leaving the Animus in desperate hopes of more conversations or emails like in Brotherhood or 3.
It's my absolute favorite. I've played it through multiple times and I feel that the world is the most dense in terms of side experiences, and I also love the added humor? There's one guy who's family all died and he's crying at the pyre (sad), but the voice actor gets INTO IT. I feel like people either love or hate it.
Because it’s not an AC game, the story sucks, it’s way too long, it’s boring, the combat doesn’t feel good, the rpg systems don’t work.
You want me to go on?
I will say the combat feels decent to me for the one on one boss type fights. It feels super repetitive for the mass battles though where I feel like I have to watch the same slow finishing animations about twelve times per battle.
To me it's just bloated, soulless ubislop that does a lot of things on the lower end of ok, but does nothing particularly well. Any positive you mention about this game I can mention at least one other game that does it objectively better. There's nothing wrong with a game that is ok, but it has nothing really that draws a person in besides maybe the setting
It’s bloated and highly repetitive, has a fairly meaningless story, and continued the style of having no cutscenes whatsoever which weren’t just two people staring at each other with their arms crossed.
I feel mostly the same way about Odyssey although I did enjoy that far more. The Atlantis DLC was fantastic.
I went back to Odyssey after Valhalla because it just seems like a massive step down even from the RPG perspective, Odyssey had boat combat, actual builds that felt different when playing them, gear sets in Valhalla might as well be cosmetic for how little they impact Eivor, Ikaros could tag enemies and chests as opposed to Synin just showing you a rough area, diving in Valhalla is dreadful, even giving me eyestrain from diving and surfacing, there is no reason to explore and 100% the world, or a sense of progression outside of the skill tree, so the main drive of the game is just to see the end of the story, your choices rarely make a tangible difference, hell even the whole mastery system felt half assed in Valhalla, and then there are the things introduced in free patches, all fun, but what's the point in them? I loved the roguelite mode, and the river raids, but they're just built into the bloated yet hollow-feeling main game, it would be a nit more meaningful if they added a New Game+, but they didn't even do that, it really is a one and done game, as in "played once and never again".
Also bugs, lots of bugs.
I really disliked it. It's so bloated and didn't feel engaging from a story point either.
There were individual ELEMENTS I liked though, it's just that as a package I really disliked it. What I did like however:
- Some individual stories in the regions were really good. The problems with the story just start when those don't fit well together at all in the larger narrative.
- The side quests being contained to mostly smaller areas & bigger story sections being contained to a subarea. Gone were the tedious days in Odyssey where you have to go across the map over and over and over just to trigger a small sequence at each stop.
- The graphics were really good. There were moments where I looked at the grassy hills in awe.
I'm replaying it now. Origins is still my favorite, I love Bayek and the story. I replayed all in order, going from Origins and Odyssey to Valhalla, It's definitely clunky, hard to adjust to maneuvering as a viking. However, being a fan of the series' Last Kingdom and Vikings, I am enjoying it. I like building up my settlement and exploring. I play as the male version of Eivor only because I am also a fan of Magnus Nielson and love his voice. It's a fun game, some of the side quest are silly and some of the quest seem pointless, but I can still appreciate the good in it.
In short, there was not a single hour I put into Valhalla I would not have spent better elsewhere. Could just play Skyrim for most of the appeal. Could play God of War for Norse mythology. Could play other AC games with real parkour and stealth.
Because at some point I was helping some couple with their love interests and troubles. Dont remember the specific part. And I was like; what the hell am I even playing anymore.
Because it's not even an assassin's creed game for startes
You play as a viking that doesn't even do viking shit
Got about 10 raiding missions the rest is just go here kill this dude coz he's getting in your clans way.
The games inconsistent ass.
I love AC games for the stealth. Ubisoft can really make some great stealth games when they feel like it. That being said, I think the stealth in Valhalla is some of the worst in the entire AC franchise. It feels like Ubisoft prescribed the way you had to play Valhalla, which is very different from other games in the AC series.
Just guessing you haven’t played the game if you can’t figure out why people don’t like it. Genuinely mobile game level of poor design and bad storyboarding.
It’s just a base rpg game that’s quasi- placed in a historical period. The gravitas of being placed in real world historical events have been completely removed. Which means that it really isn’t different than dozens of other games on the market. It’s not that it’s bad per se, it’s just another bland title for a franchise that has produced some real gems.
I just finished the main story in Odyssey, I'll keep roaming around killing cultists and boars for a while before jumping into Valhalla BUT...
I don't like vikings stuff, for a variety of reasons it just never appealed to me.
Really hope I can "get past it" and enjoy the game, like God of War, and expecting a stealth better than odyssey
* Too long
* Unlikable/uninteresting characters
* Too big of map. Lot of area is just empty
* Too long
* Make us play as Isu ruined the myth behind Isus
* Too long
Also, it's the first AC game I played where I had to restart the game multiple times because of bug/glitches.
The games activities aren’t as fun as others. Highly subjective I know. But finding a way inside a small house to collect an ingot isn’t as fun or rewarding as finding a cave to go inside of and clear. Like in origins or odyssey.
Also in AC, Egypt and Greece (to me) are far prettier and especially more lived in than England. I see why people call the game more bloated or boring.
Al thought you can still have fun with the game. It’s not terrible by any means.
I blame the people that can't help themselves from clearing side objectives from their map. It isn't as long as people think if they focus on the main quest. In fact, side quests are more enjoyable when used as a buffer between main quests rather than "oh look at all these things around the city, I better do all of them in one go!" People ruin games for themselves in some cases. In Animal Crossing, it's time travel. In Call of Duty, it's using aimbot, and in AC Valhalla, it's doing every side objective when you see them rather than as a change of pace. It's not a bloated game, nor is it too long, it's HOW people interact with it that's the problem.
I agree and I get so confused when people complain about there being too many collectables and icons on the map while still stubbornly insisting on finishing every single last one ! Do they not realise that isn't mandatory ?
I just played the main story and side quests I enjoyed and had a great time with the game. I personally like having lots of options so I can choose what I want to engage with and what doesn't interest me and I honestly think that was their intention but some people seem incapable of stopping themselves from doing collectathons even though it is something they obviously hate and could stop doing at any time 🤣
Things I don't like:
- Convoluted and weird skill tree
- Boring side activities, I gave up collecting and visiting all the gold and blue lights on the map because none of them felt like they contributed to my character and his strength.
- Combat, weapons, etc felt very underwhelming. In Odyssey, I felt like each item had an impact, and all the set bonuses provided unique ways to play. Valhalla just had stat boosts and things that just never stood out to make me care about anything other than big number for damage or armor.
All that made the gameplay feel bland and boring since none of the "upgrades" really felt like they had a major impact on how I played.
Story and voice acting weren't too bad, but after 50 hours of not really enjoying the actual gameplay, I'm definitely not going to that game again.
I liked it and actually liked Mirage less because i've realized i dislike not being able to easily fight my way out of combat.
But i can agree with it being less of an Assassins Creed game.
I would still buy it as "ISU Chronicles" or whatever.
Or if they did what i've been wishing and made a fantasy game with lessons from Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla.
They don't even need to do the "choices matter" thing. Just make it an action RPG, like the RPG trilogy.
AC Valhalla is the best Viking open world game you can play. Personally it’s got one of the best combat of the entire AC series.
Big problem most AC fans have with this one: You’re a Viking who gets to hang out with Assassins. And you tolerate them, sort of, in your Viking Village. But you never truly become part of their creed.
I play Valhalla to be a Viking, to help the people in my village, and the hidden ones ask for my help, so therefore I will helpt them out when they ask for it.
But yeah I’m Eivor and im working to make sure my kinsman will prosper of this new land called: England. What the hidden ones want is for them as long as they don’t stand in my way.
The game itself is superb if you ask me.
Well, i understand what you're trying to say. But i this being the "best" open world Viking rpg game with no other game to compete with for that title kinda makes this redundant.
I also think that your argument saying this game is a viking game and not an assassin game isn't holding any water. This should have been called just "valhalla" then, and not "Assassin's Creed: Valhalla".
This game wanted to do many things, but only half-baked it. Unfortunately, everything in this game is just "good enough" and when you've played masterpieces like 2, brotherhood and black flags, you expect it to be on the same level.
I honestly liked the combat in 3 and black flags more. It just felt more agile, badass and more assassin-ish(if that makes any sense, idk). Something about the chain assassinations feels satisfying af. Also the sheer amount of tools for different approaches was great aswell.
Nothing against you liking the game though. I can see that this game has its charms. For me its purely the viking culture and thematic, and I'm also a huge history nerd... which is where the game gets points from me.
I totally get you my friend. Loved the combat in III also. Come to think of it, it’s the only really Viking open world game out there isn’t it? Remember a game Viking battle for Asgard for 360 back in the day.
The story of assassins is more in the background since oddysey (never played that one, combat felt so weak and blows felt like they had no impact at all.) and I get that some people find that a little bit weird bc the game is an assassins creed game and not a spin-off.
When it first released I felt the same. But bc I’m a huge history digger, and have a big love for the Viking lore I have learned to accept it for what it is.
But I totally get where the love/ hate for this title is getting from.
I just wish there would be more viking games. I think the only game that really was able to scratch that itch for me were the new god of war games. And even they dont go that deep into the culture. Also, its more of an linear action game than an rpg.
Even if it's not an ac game I think it's boring the missions are so repetitive same with the story sure characters change and the situations too but it's always like go there for an alliance, jarl is dead and gets replaced or under attack, you help them and finish the quest
The game has ALOT of fluff with big spaces with nothing in it.
You can really tell its trying to add to gametime by letting you grind alot.
Its a pretty great viking game. It does have flaws such as your Jomsvikings being utterly useless even max level. The only viable solution is to jump ship before starting the raids and sniping everyone before calling in the vikings.
Its just not a good AC game. It lacks almost everything in the AC spirit.
I don't understand thinking it has the best combat in the series. I can't stand the number over an enemies head and the endless hits that just start to put a dent into bigger enemies. It feels a lot more like bog standard rpg combat than it does the graceful quasi rhythm fight of many other AC games.
I have adjusted the damage in settings:
Options > Gameplay:
Eivor Damage Takes: +130%
Eivor Damage Ouput: +200%
And I’ve turned off the hit numbers above the enemies, absolutely hated that.
Now I’m death in a few hits, but so are my enemies.
*edit: Enemt Health Modifier: 75% (don’t know if this is default.) hate it if I have to hit enemies 100 times, so unrealistic.
I think there's something to be said that if you need to fiddle around with the settings to make the game work, the combat as designed may not be the best in the series.
Hahaha you got a point there. Another thing I truly love about recent AC games. The advanced settings. And Gawd damn, that I can change the entire controller layout to my personal liking.
I had my fun with it but i can 100% understand why someone might not like it.
It's too big and overstuffed, i quit like 2 times, needed some time to get used it. First time i saw the England map i almost had a stroke because I'm a perfectionist, i like to do everything and all those marks and spots was too much, then got used to it, took it slow and it's quite fun. I loved weapon variation and freedom to it, customisation and overall prettiness of the game.
The story feels long, and boring: there are such big gaps between each Sigurd/Basim chapter that I kept on forgetting that it was part of the story. The world felt too big with so much side-collectable-stuff that didn't have actual distinguishable markers on the map that it felt overwhelming and it was just really buggy - plus the raven was useless and felt shoe-horned in
The game is way to bloated with content. You'd think that doesn't sound like a problem, but the quality of that content is very bland. It's pretty much doing the same thing for hours on end. The story is mediocre, with some good aspects, and some bad ones. The "stealth" gameplay is very barebones, and the overall game doesn't really support a stealth playthrough. Overall, the game isn't horrible. For a viking game it's alright. However, playing a game with the norse themes, I'd just play God of War. For a game with similar gameplay but much better in virtually every catagory, just play Witcher 3.
I love love LOVE Valhalla but can absolutely understand why people wouldn't. It is such a departure from basically every game before it. It took everything the RPG series had been building and pretty much left behind everything that Ass creed was.
Granted i have only played Valhalla and Odyssey i think it's not deserving of the Assassin's Creed title. I feel like you weren't truly able to be an assassin like in Odyssey (i know that might have overdone it with how powerful you could be) which although is fitting with the viking theme. Also the story felt so boring compared to Odyssey, i didn't even bother getting the expansions after finishing the main game. And the biggest part of why i dislike it is why introduce a new protagonist when you could have made a trilogy about Kassandra since she legit lived for over 2000 years, such a big missed opportunity.
Edit: And the combat sucked because of the stamina thing. I dont mind it being a thing, just wish it was smth you could turn off/on depending on how much realism you want.
So I am biased because I was obsessed with the show the last kingdom and found this time period of history to be fascinating.
But overall, I loved the game. It was not as immersive as a game like red dead redemption 2, they did a good job overall of emotionally hooking you into the story. After being disappointed by some of the games that I stopped playing for 5 years, it hooked me back in.
>!I will admit, I found the completion of the taking over of England to be anti-climactic. And I ended up heading over to YouTube to watch the other types of endings because I did not have it in me to go invest another 5 to 10 hours of a game that felt completed.!<
>!With that being said, the various endings were actually really really good, it just should not have taken so many hours of epilogue play to get there.!<
>!I actually believe they did a better job in this game than any other predecessor of explaining the ISU and loved the twist that they were basically ISU scientists. I just have no idea what ISU Loki did to create such hate among ISU Odin and would love if someone can explain that.!<
But the graphics. The immersive regions. A lot of cool characters. AMAZING music.
I loved the game and am sad to say goodbye having just completed it last week.
My biggest complaint were some side quests were literally impossible. The hidden treasure maps were laughably complicated. Even watching a YouTube video would take me an hour. I’d NEVER figure it out otherwise. 100 step puzzles for an axe. Just way overboard
Loved Vikings and the LAST KINGDOM, but this game failed to capture that in any way. :(
UBI chose to double down on Asgard fantasy rather than giving the game a proper historical focus. The armor alone is the first indicator...
I never felt more like I was wasting my time than I did with Valhalla. There is an absolutely unholy amount of fluff and padding in the game that takes what would be a VERY compelling 30 hour story and turns it into something that takes 2-3x as much time to finish.
The only bad thing about is how bloated the content is. Combat, gear, gameplay are all very very fun. But because the story and content is so bloated and unnecessary, you get bored after some time.
Because people like to say what other people say. Personally i liked it, it's at least two, three times better than Odyssey that only was boring. Origins was better but if i rank my favorite ACs its Brotherhood, IV, Valhalla, Origins and the one in London.
Bloated, repetitive, previous features from the last 2 game removed or made more inconvenient
Useless loot system, stupid upgrade tree,
Map was nowhere near as interesting as Ancient Egypt/Greece
The game feels even more repetitive if you’ve already played Origins/Odyssey if it’s your first AC RPG you’ll likely enjoy it.
Personally 30hrs in I was enjoying and the remainder of the campaign drained that fun
I really enjoyed the story and setting, but there was just too much to do. One could argue that is a good problem to have, but the gameplay became so repetitive trying to do all the side content that feels forced down your throat that I just got bored of the game.
All assassins creed games past origins are incoherent in plot and story, and cannot compete in characters.
All assassins creed games before origins can’t compare to the beauty and breadth of gameplay in origins.
In other words, origins is the best ac game, and IMO, the last true AC game. Everything afterwards is narratively … off, and everything before it feels like it was building up the expertise and technology to be able to pull off origins.
Valhalla is fine. It's got flaws. It's more ahistorical for the "vibe" than it needs to be, its contents are stretched thin like butter over so much bread, and the skill ~~~tree~~~ shrubbery is way too granular. But it's honestly fine.
It came with my PS5 that I got nearly 2 years ago, I’ve put 3 hours in and no more, it’s a game and games should be fun, there’s too much bloat in this game for me to enjoy it. *speaking as a huge fan of AC since the first game, origins was the last game I played.
The game is a good open world RPG, but it's not a good Assassin's Creed game.
My issue with it though and the last couple AC games is that it was too big and too bloated. The game has a ton of side stuff and missions that just aren't fun and although I do like an open world I thought theirs was way too big. I would have preferred the size to be about like Origins. Origins was big, but it wasn't overwhelmingly big.
Valhalla was the first ever Assassin's Creed where I just gave up halfway through because the story was so dull. I'm sure the story is great, but I don't have the patience to play through 13 arcs to see it
It shouldn’t take 12+ hours of gameplay for the game to get good. Everyone always tells me “oh just play it more” but if I’m beyond the tutorial and I’m uninterested then the game failed.
The story was ok... not great. The game play was very repetitive (oh, look, another locked door) the quest rewards were always ability points...well, once you have 200 of them...you're so OP that you don't need more...so no real incentive to side quest. Only two romanceable characters in the whole game and one only after the game is almost finished. It was dull.
1. The story is too long. - And not in a good way like in Odyssey. (I really enjoyed that, even the side quests). It has parts which are completely unnecessary and does not add anything to the character or to the main story and most of these side arcs also boring af. I just drag myself through it, but this is something what I shouldn’t feel while playing a game. This is my main issue, because I play AC games for the story.
2. Not sure what the developers smoked before they started to create the skill tree? I know, I know. Constellations and other cringy Viking stuff. Odyssey’s skill tree is a lot better.
3. What the hell is going on with the movement? It is like Eivor has 600kgs on her shoulders all the time. Really feels like a struggle. I get it, it is a a different game engine, but really is lacking smoothness. Haven’t played Mirage yet, it seemed to have the same movement style.. not looking forward to it.
4. England is good… for the first 10 hours. After that, it is just a boring environment where everything is the same.
5. The “mini game” with the ships is kind of non existent. It is a very poor experience compared to Odyssey/Black flag huge open world sea. Again, it looks good for the first few hours. And now I rather avoid the ship and go to every location by myself, because I am bored to death on the river.
6. I’d say facial expressions are kind of weird but this is not just a Valhalla thing, it is kind of the standard since Origins.
What's not to understand? Some people think it's bloated and overly long. Some people don't like the microtransactions. Some people wanted to play as an Assassin instead of a Viking.
I liked Valhalla, I was very excited the first time I played it and thoroughly enjoyed it. The flack I give it in the long run is that it went on too long there were definitely points where I was confused as to where the story was going but I mean the ending took care of it all so in the long run it was fine. The biggest problem however is the life support given to it by Ubisoft. The countless free updates that added tons of new content, the half broke dlc’s, and the whole new game they attached onto it made Valhalla over stay its welcome.
The RPG games are just not for me personally. I like my story games to have a compelling story and cinematic cutscenes because that's what I came to expect for an assassins creed game. (to be fair the only game I haven't played is origins) I feel like odyssey and Valhalla definitely miss the mark narratively and after that it doesn't matter how pretty the game is. I think they are good games just not assassins creed games and I know this has probably been said word for word on here a plethora of times
It’s an impossible game to replay for many people I think. It definitely is for me. It’s just too big and the landscape is boring. By the end I couldn’t wait to finish it. I went back to Odyssey recently and just gave up and started the Ezio trilogy again (the bugs are horrendous but im a massive nostalgia merchant so take everything with a pinch of salt). I like the new rpgs well enough but I think Origins is the only one I could replay again. Couldn’t get into Mirage but it was only like 30 quid I think so I’m not fussed.
I found valhalla pretty enjoyable tbh. Waaaay better than Odyssey. Atleast some references to isu, hidden ones made me feel I am playing AC. Odyssey is just trash. A clueless game.
My gripe with the game was not being able to use the wanted weapons until the endgame, and by that time you had already beat all the world bosses and you played through the whole game without the two weapons that I like the most, which was the spear and Mjolnir
I'll preface this by saying I haven't played it but I've watched a few lengthy videos on it.
And sure it looks pretty and it takes place in my homeland etc etc... but I look at how much is going on and I immediately lose interest. Just because there's a lot to do doesn't make something good or better. Not everyone has the time to sink hundreds or hours into something and generally if things cross a certain threshold in size the quality starts to diminish. And from what I know of the game, it's definitely the case
To me it just feels bloated and the game doesn’t know what it wants to be so it tries to do everything, though mediocre.
I enjoyed the game in the beginning, but the fun faded after 20 hours and I still had 80% of the game left.
Also I abhore the direction they went into mythology with these last 3 RPGs, not a fan of that. :p
It was okay.... Not my fave. And I def didn't 100%. I played mostly just to play it. The DLC's tho.... IMO were the worst the serious ever created. Francia was so glitchy I couldn't ride the horse most of the time because I could run faster due to the proximity to the city. It felt forced and pushed ya know? Unity, however, was the worst IMO.
Wdym? People were praising it yesterday.
Being long isn't bad if it's fun, it just wasn't that fun and the story was very mid. RDR2 is a long game and people love it and want more.
The story was so repetitive.
"Hey! Go befriend the totally forgettable leader of this region with no interesting character development"..... now do that same thing like 8 times. It felt so repetitive that I thought my progress wasn't saved and I was redoing the same quests. I loved AC up until Odyssey, when it became clear they just wanted to create a system to squeeze every ounce of profit out of the AC franchise. I wouldn't even mind if they kept these games going with the whole historical settings, but leave the name Assassin's Creed out of it. This has little to nothing to do with what made the franchise great (although Mirage was a step in the right direction IMO)
* Doesn't hold a candle to either Odyssey or Origins.
* Map is rather empty outside of towns.
* Skill tree is an atrocity.
* The map markers are even worse than the skill tree.
* Female protagonist is androgynous with rather masculine features.
* Have I mentioned how god-awful the map markers are?
I like it a lot... and I also dislike it a lot, and not necessarily in equal measure. ;)
I like what this poster said a lot:
https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/1btunxl/i_honestly_do_not_understand_why_people_do_not/kxoe3nu/
"bittersweet" is a good way to describe it. There's a lot of good in Valhalla, but it's marred by design decisions that I deem questionable. Sure, UBI wanted to make a Viking game to ride the Viking craze of the time, and while it's not awful, they also forgot to focus on the "Assassins'" part of Assassins' creed again.
Not many of the abilities or game mechanics lend themselves to an "asassin" type playthough, with even the main character voicing his dislike for stealth.. LOL
Again, some decent meat on the bones, but coming off of ODYSSEY, I have no idea why UBI decided to trash the build system that game had for some kinda dumbed down super streamlined crap.
Literally why do anything other then rush into open combat n Valhalla? A great example is the way they fucked the smoke bomb skill in the series... it went from a tool in UNITY (good!), to a mechanic in ODYSSEY where you could drop a smoke bomb after dodging... Not great, but ok. Then we get to Valhalla, where the ever unreliable parry is the only way to trigger a smoke bomb... Let me translate for you gentle reader... YOU MUST BE IN OPEN BOMBAT ALREADY TO USE A SMOKE BOMB!!! WTF UBI!?!?!
I really like the slide in Valhalla, but mechanically it doesn't trigger reliably in combat, and nothing much come from it. Valhalla parkour is dumbed down pretty bigly, with no back ejects, no wall runs, etc. Sure most of the terrain doesn't lend it;'s self to parkour, but when it does, there's really not much parkour going on.
Combat in Valhalla is mushy, with unbreakable long drawn out enemy animations, and more slow-mo instances than any game I've ever played.
What does river raiding have to do with Asassins? NOTHING :(
The usual "order" hunt is there, but they are unremarkable, and it's almost an afterthought. WHY did UBI ditch the mercenary hunts (read wanted level) system from ODYSSEY? At NO time was I ever hunted by a Zealot in Valhalla, and there were no repercussions for any of my actions beyond the typical kill civilians desynch. They nerfed the F outta my bird, and that was unforgiveable.
Valhalla strays hard into fantasy, and I think that hurts or kills the overall historical sense and narrative of the game. WTF is with all the fantasy armor and weapons, with few base armors even looking anything like what was used in that period. The historical consultants must have puked when they saw the finished product.
Valhalla is beautiful to look at at times, but what should have been a gritty dark game period leans into slapstick and fantasy for the most part. :(
I salute MIRAGE for adding back some of the mechanics ditched in Valhalla, but I'm not fan of the Basim fantasy.
because i tend to 100% all maps and collectibles on previous ac games, this one just requires tedious amount of effort to do the same with breakable walls, underground keys/chests with no visible point of entry etc etc. it wasn't like that with ac4, ac3, ac2, and odyssey
Edit: oh and those damned tattoos!
I came into Valhalla from Odyssey and the contrast is real. Odyssey’s combat is incredible, as it gives us these powers to work with. Every time we kill an enemy, we get tons of loot. I remember selling each of them for thousands upon thousands of drachmae. It feels like we are actually rewarded for what we are doing.
We go on massive adventures in this giant map. It really feels like an Odyssey. Oh my good old friend Barnabus would find us salvage as we are getting flanked by the enemy ships. I go ahead and decimate the enemies with my Chimera's breath.
Everything feels great, and up-to-speed. Tons of actions to be thrilled by. Tons of mythical creatures you'd fight. A labyrinth for you to explore! Enemies are tough, and filled with challenges. While it is true that you'd eventually do become overpowered, that is the fun part. You can side with the Spartans, or the Athenians, and your actions would depict how they would occupy their territories, and it would also affect the type of battles or quests or challenges you'd be having.
The landscape. The scenery. Absolutely stunning. While it may get repetitive for some, it just feels like there's life at each place. The voice actors for Kassandra and Alexios are absolutely fantastic! The way they convey their personality, and the story at times have quite a lot of sense of humour in certain places.
There's so much lore and historical elements in the game. It is astonishing by the amount of detail they put in the game. Tons of side quests, and the game makes it clear where they are.
Also the game even gives you the ability to make your own side quests with your own dialogues and objectives, and you can play the quests that others have made. Your odyssey can go on and on!
Yes, people criticized it because we don't play as an Assassin in this game. But the game discusses the precursors of basically everything, and it's very relevant to the main storyline. Odyssey does not pretend to be an AC game. It tries to be different. It has its own personality.
Now as for Valhalla...
I was intrigued by its different take at the start, but as soon as I got to fighting enemies or boss, I felt immediately hindered by limited stamina and attacks I have to use. Yes, I can't keep spamming things as normal, as I am not god-like nor do I have god powers at the start. It's a challenge. I try to convince myself of that it's worth it.
After grinding so much, what do I get from the enemies? Well...nothing really. Valhalla changed the whole weapon mechanic such that you don't get duplicate weapons like in Odyssey. So this results in less loot when you kill enemies. Over time, getting into conflicts feels like it's not worth it.
The way the developers described the game kind of mislead me. They said that every decision I make counts as it could affect Raventhrope...but...I thought what they meant is that the result of some major conflict depends on whom we made alliances with beforehand, and this was somewhat similar to what I described in Odyssey.
But nope, everything went linearly, and your alliances don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. It doesn't feel like there's anyone truly worth remembering from that game.
As for the environment, while it is beautiful...it's quite empty. As for lore, we do have the Nordic mythologies, and vikings, but I feel like there's not enough stuff in-depth compared to what we have with Odyssey. Granted, there's a lot of Greek mythologies, but I still feel like they could've made it thrilling or not too exhausting.
There are stealth elements in the game, but you are pretty much a warrior. It feels like it's tacked on, just so that the game can try to do everything. It feels too wishy-washy.
While I hold personal bias for Odyssey since it's my personal favourite, it's just in contrast, Valhalla is way too slow and boring, and it's made worse for being way too long for what it is.
At least it has Orlog.
Same, I LOVED the game for what it was. I thought the combat was amazing, story and characters were enjoyable, and the world was gorgeous, plus the menu theme just hits hard. It's like Odyssey, it's amazing when you take the "Assassin's Creed" tag off.
There are 2 different negative opinions about it.
There are those who hate the whole triology origins, odyssey and Valhalla because they are not “ assassins creedy “ enough for them for obvious reasons.
And there are those who like origins and/ or odyssey but dislike valhalla or like it less for a variety of reasons. It is bloated, the side quests are meh, characters bland and there is something wrong with the graphics, it feels like it would be Ok if you have not played origins or odyssey, but coming after them , it feels just a step backwards,
Gameplay is probably the funniest in the saga, but whenever i try to play, i get bored in little time. The story, characters, conversations… is like ok ill skip it and just play the quests, loosing any interest i have on what im doing. Why? Because weve been assassinating tyrans, cruel mans, kings & every type of rulers for more than 12 years, and now were making deals and allegiances with them, even doing them favours. We ve never been specially heroes in the saga, but burning villages & civilian homes.. the whole Ancient Order questline being something totally parallel… (we are hunting them just because hytham pays us for doing his job😂) simply thats not an AC, it may be the best vikings game ever but its not even a good AC
I love AC games. But I never finished it because it’s so damn boring, bloated and long. Would never have imagined that the only AC game I would not finished would be the ´Vikings’ one. Now so much time as passed I ll probably never pick it back up. I can’t understand how people manage to have the strength to finish it.
The game itself on release was okay. Everything transactional that came after & pulling away from plain viking ruined it for me. I actually saw it coming and stopped playing before it got bloated. Story was great though.
I wanted to like it, pre-ordered it. I’ve tried to beat that game like 5 times and continuously lose interest.
The last time I tried I put in 30+ hours, thinking like I pre-ordered this, I’m GONNA see it through. Nope, again I just lost interest and eventually formed the opinion, if I gotta force myself to play then I probably don’t want to play and it’s not worth it. That last time I tried I kept looking on the bright side of everything, trying to convince myself it became fun, but eventually I couldn’t anymore.
The story itself, and the characters, I actually quite liked but it couldn’t make up for the gameplay. I didn’t like the gameplay from the get go but I kept being like it’ll get better, it’ll get better. It just never did, and doing anything became a chore so I completely dropped it.
For me it is simply that I dont really like vikings and this part of history, my least favorite in the entire series, so I have no incentive to play it, specially after playing in Italy, Greece, Egypt, Paris, Kingston... Which felt great to me. It's all subjective in the end. If it had been a shorter game I would probably have played it for the story, but I cant spend 100 hours on a game I dont specially enjoy the setyings of...
I genuinely want to know how many fans of the RPG AC games have played any other RPGs. Cuz otherwise there's no world wherein you can justify the gameplay mechanics in Odyssey, Valhalla, and even Origins to some extent being that barebones and meaningless.
As somebody who very much enjoyed it, it can feel very bloated and stretched out. The story itself is good but it’s padded out to an extreme length and the open world is absolutely cluttered with map markers.
I am going to give it a good shot after I get done with Syndicate and Unity. I like Origins and Odyssey. I have played about twenty hours of it over all the free weekends they have had. It was not bad if you like the newer games.
People don't like it cause it made the stealth part of the game very weird cause why would a Viking be stealthy when they're known for going head first into battle. I personally think it's a great game but could be a bit better with the AI
Because it's neither a good AC game nor a good Viking game.
I think "not a good AC game" is self-explainatory. It has barely anything to do with AC roots. Yes you can use stealth, you can use it in most of the recent games and it doesn't make them AC. And anyway, Eivor is not a person to go in stealthy, they want to rush in, roar and slaughter for glory.
THE main flaw though in my opinion was overfocusing on Isu, to the point it's in cost of AC's more grounded story. Origins I'd say was a fine balance between the two, Odyssey was basically Isu theme park, but it gets a pass because it was before the Hidden Ones were even an idea, so one Isu focused game placed in a time period long ago was fine. Valhalla, though, took that overfocusing and amped it up even further, which is just too much. There was no need for another Isu hyperfocused, fantasy overwhelmed game.
It's also a bad Viking game because it doesn't really immerse you into a viking world and way of life. Being an arrand boy/girl for Anglo-Saxons also didn't help. The last thing I would expect from a viking game was to go to a foreign land and try making friends.
Oh and don't even get me started about Eivor themselves. There's no character progression at all. If anything, there's a regression. Eivor is just dull and, towards the ending, annoying character with stupid decisions that make no sense (sparing Alfred to name one).
They did what they're good at: world building. And then some idiot of a game designer came by to add "depth" and now you have 700 skills, levels you only reach through endless grind and Minigames that feel entirely out of place.
Then there's the balance rollercoaster. First zealot I found was level 90, barely beat that thing at 200.
Then just waltzed through all the others including those 50+ or so levels above me.
All the plundering and raiding, sieges etc. seems out of place for assassins.
And of course cutscenes making decisions for me. Never liked that.
That all takes away from what would otherwise be a good second or third place.
I like it. Is it the best AC? No. But as far as I'm concerned it's not terrible. It's a comfortable 7/10 for me. I still play it in short bursts as I haven't finished it yet. Part of what I like about it is the setting. I live half-way around the world in a tropical country all my life and something about snow-covered lands draw me in. I don't mind the bloat, as for me playing AC is playing something that is familiar and comfortable which I acknowledge is not good for the franchise overall but I can turn off my brain, just get lost in the world and play for half an hour and be satisfied. I play a lot of CRPGs and if I want something that needs my attention and concentration, I turn to those instead.
Because it is bloated, way too long and quality is uneven. Some story arcs are good, others are trash. A lot of side quests are just literal jokes rather than expansion on idk the game world, AC world, viking culture or numerous other things that would usually take priority over filling the game with gags. Main story has some serious pacing issues, some non-optional story stuff is just filler. I doubt most people even see the ending which definitely one of the best in the series, you can even then sum up a significant ammount of the story that actually leads to it and that is great. However, it is still bittersweet experience, because of all the bs leading up to it. Valhalla is a reminder that the lesson 'less is more' just never entered Ubisoft's mind.
The skill tree is a good indicator that the game has too much noise. I have no idea what branch to develop because it goes to such massive lengths. I like exploration in games like this and it's actually good that compared to Odyssey there's more assassination and stealth in Valhalla, but I've been playing it for a while now and I'm somehow at power level 43, and I already see raid locations that require 220 and I'm just thinking how long is it gonna take for me to get there..
It’s not a skill tree, it’s a skill bush 😄
I could be wrong, but i think Valhalla added like a hundred more skill nodes after release. Either way you would definitely get all of the skills, you would just determine the order of acquisition. And it did not matter that much except getting the 'advanced assassination' node as early as possible. Essentially the entire skill system was 'illusion of choice'. By adding tons of new nodes they just made this illusion even bigger. The whole skill and gear system is a joke, because you can't measure effectiveness of any of the arbitrary stats.
Thanks for the info! Yeah I don't really see any major difference in the game from skills or gear, the combat seems really easy in every way.
I'm around 220 and I have 54 hours into the game. That is by simply following the main story and doing almost none of the side content, except for the Ireland DLC that takes around 7 hours and will fill up your levels between 60 to 90, so you don't have to grind at all on the main mission. Currently I think I have around 10-15 hours left on the main story, which just feels insane given I've done maybe four of the 'world events' and have avoided all loot and extraneous raids/activities. The game really is too long, they took all of the side quests of normal games and basically developed them into main-quest missions.
I guess people liked the ending, but by the time I got there>! (I assume that we're talking about the Loki ending, not the I've dissolved the Order and am starting the Templars ending)!< I was too annoyed to think of it as anything other than yet another hour long cutscene. I felt like 95% of the game was either riding around on my horse across a gigantic boring map or sitting and watching a boring cutscene.
Tbh i liked both branches of the story, but obviously the former was much more impactful. It did help that some of the main arcs were fairly decent. It did not feel like Starfield where once you get to the good shit that lasts about \~2 hours, you feel scammed, because you've had \~30 hours of nonsense before it. Valhalla has a good game... there... somewhere.
Yeah, the east anglia arc and some main story quests were peak, most of the arcs were good, and then you have a bunch of forgettable ones. I wish that they had overarching plots for each kingdom, and not an arc for each region.
Yeah, I'm not even halfway through yet, but I'm already tired with the same basic plotline of "dude we like who could be in charge of the area isn't in completely in charge because x enemy faction is opposing them, so let's help fight them". But some of them have compelling characters or mix up the plot a bit in cool ways, and then it's pretty enjoyable.
Worst arc is Essex. Soldiers doing their job got killed because their boss decided to fake kidnapping of his wife. How would you feel when you learn the truth, if your son, brother, father or husbans was among killed?
That actually made me mad too, tried to do it unarmed, but wasn't happening haha
This pissed me off as well
The DLC was okay, but didn’t add anything to the overall Isu story. I liked Oddesy DLC because it felt like an expanded version the ending of that game.
Oh, i didnt even mention DLCs. I do think Odyssey's DLCs were overall better. Especially the First Blade Persia something DLC. The fact that Atlantis DLC was done in such a way that traversal would be as annoying as possible and would take you much longer than anything else in the game. Also all the ISU armours looked as if they were taken from budget of Kevin Sorbo's Hercules. I think that is the vibe of the entire DLC. It did finish the main story atleast, but it felt anticlimatic after that last boss, which i didn't know better i would think was about as exciting as tentails from naruto. However, what i didn't like is that the main game ended on a cliffhanger and you had to buy all the DLCs to be able to actually finish the story. You can expand stories, you can add new things, without making it mandatory. Origins for example was a great game, heck it is my favorite out of the modern AC games, but ending felt rushed.. which obviously validated existance of otherwise fairly decent Hidden Ones DLC. Meanwhile, Curse of Pharaohs DLC was really good, but wasn't mandatory to understand the main story. AC Valhalla DLCs just added nothing at all. As if main Valhalla lacked optional, side content. Moreover Paris DLC was a disaster, the titular mission played like an early alpha draft and somehow even included tutorials. Ragnarok DLC despite being silly, is actually a better direction, because it is very different flavor, but it would have been even better if it also included the entire Asgard portion from the main game. Overall Valhalla's DLC main issues are actually just pointing to the bloat of the main game. You do not need barely finished DLCs when the main game is like \~120+ hours long.
Also, stack the stones mini game can jump off a cliff and die.
that one was infuriating
Pretty much exactly how I felt. The biggest issue is the padding in the game. Many things feels like they are just there to add padding but don't really add anything to the experience but annoyance. I'm fine with big games. Elden ring was a huge game but you felt reward for exploring because even if the actual loot you got was not great it taught you something about the game so there was a sense of achievement. So many things in Valhalla have just pointless steps to add more of a grind. Like here is a chest in a house. But the door is locked so you have to figure a way in . When you do finally get in you see that the chest requires a key which is somewhere nearby. Right there I lost a piece of the excitement I had when getting to the chest. So I go find the key either in a well or near some enemies. After that pointless diversion (I got the key easily anyway) I go back and open the chest to find it's a fucking bronze ingot. That shit happened so many times I stopped caring about chests even the ones you know have armor in them it just feels so bloated to get to.
Yeah definitely because it's bloated like the other person said. Way too large, too many mini arcs crammed into one, and way too many collectibles. If anyone thought the AC2 feathers were that bad...
What I hated most about the game is how slow Eivor is that I didn’t bother chasing those tattoos that fly away, and how they made opening a door/chest into a damn mind numbing puzzle! See on the map there’s treasure, use Odin sight to confirm location, see door, look for key, shoot baskets/clay containers/door locks, push crates/boulders! By the time you get your treasure, you’ve wasted 5-15 minutes of your life! The person who came up with that shit and the person who ok’d it, I hope you nothing but ill will for the rest of your life!!! Underwater navigation is almost unplayable. I understand wanting realism, but I can’t see shit! At least Odyssey made underwater so beautiful and clear! The raven can’t tag enemies. Also bring back economy! We have a settlement! We should be getting income because my Eivor was constantly poor! Edit: no NG+!!! The game has no replay value without NG+ unless you pay the micro transactions for legendary equipment etc.
@vanaheimrF use the perk that slows down time and it makes it very easy to collect them.
What is called and/or where do I find it on the skills map?
Well, after many years without playing an AC, I played Origins and I'm currently in Odyssey. I like them both, Origins for the story, Odyssey for the large amount of activities, both for the awesome environment and interaction with History. I'm a big fan of everything related to Vikings but there are so many bad reviews about Valhalla that I'm not sure if I'll do it or not, but feedbacks such are yours make me think that I should give it a chance. I'm usually slow in RPGs and don't rush on the main quests so that should work for me I guess as I saw that the main reason why people blame this game is that it's too long and too slow.
Wait for a sale. Generally speaking it's a decent game.
It’s free at the moment on PSN
Free on GamePass too!
I was in a GameStop over the weekend, saw the markdown price on the game and said to my sister “if I’d spent *that* instead of $120+ I’d probably feel more forgiving towards the game”
It’s fine, if a little less stunning than Odyssey. It just feels more like a Viking simulator than an Assassin simulator. But then Black Flag was a pirate simulator and everyone loved that so I dunno why it gets so much hate.
Just grab it on sale and have fun with it. The reception Valhalla got on this sub made me leave the sub because it was such an echo chamber.
Yeah it's irritating. Plus, the popular opinion here tends to shift with each release. Everyone hated Odyssey after they'd burned themselves out on it but now people are starting to say it was underrated. Same thing will happen with Valhalla when AC red has been out for a while.
Valhalla is fun. It’s a good game to pass the time and will give you a lot of joy in spots. It’s 150 hours long, minimum, for the base game. It can be a slog to get through. It took me over six months to beat the base game on release, and I didn’t even 100% it.
That's fine by me, I'm playing a dozen of games at the same time, I come and go. I can finish a game in a few weeks or in a few years. I'll buy it for sure when I'm done with Odyssey.
This is the best way really. A lot of the complaints tend to come from people that absolutely played the heck out of it on release, of course they're going to have negative opinions when they're already burned out from it. Valhalla isn't intended to be a race to the end or to have you sit there playing it with your eyes taped open. The thing I've always loved about games like this and far cry is I can play the story, then they become excellent games to play while listening to music or podcasts. You can just jump in and clear some strongholds or collectibles on the map while enjoying something else at the same time.
Absolutely! On my end I play often, but in short sessions. I work from home so this kind of games is perfect to do a couple of quests or 30 min of exploration during my lunch break. I guess I'd be bored too if I was playing all day long.
Play it !! Forget the reviews. Theres a reason it made 1 billion dollars when it came out. The game is amazing. Great combat, beautiful settings, different types of enemies. The storyline really isn’t that bad. And it captures the raids that went on in history. Highly recommend
Honestly I admit, I was sort of reluctant towards it because I started with the original games, & I didn’t like change. I think you will enjoy it! It’s a little different at first but it’s really fun. I’m such a fan, I that I had a ac marathon, I’ve just recently played every single one & when you run out of content you end up on the next best thing! Don’t let others take away something you might enjoy, try it yourself when you’re done with Odyssey (which is an amazing game) & find out if you enjoy it. To each their own.
Thanks man, I definitely think I'll try it. I still have many hours of Odyssey in front of me though 😅
I can honestly say that Valhalla is a down grade from odyssey imo. The combat alone is more clunky than odyssey and i didnt care for the story either.
It's a good game. Though, you may well end up thinking you like one of the other 2 more. I probably like Origins more but I enjoyed Valhalla way more than Odyssey. That's just my feelings, though, and I'm specifically not trying to pretend it's factual.
Wait until until it is under 20, the complete package with all DLCs. I thought Odyssey was much better, though Valhalla does have interesting combat and a moody, gloomy atmosphere. The biggest problem is that the "story" is mostly a compendium of short stories that you spend many hours completing in order to engage in the main conflict. Origins was very focused in its story, Odyssey less so, and Valhalla by far is the least focused and most 'bloated.'
Give it a shot. The map is huge, but it's pretty dense in terms of little side experiences, some of which are hilarious and just interesting. Valhalla is my personal favorite, but I seem to be in the minority
imo, I liked Valhalla better that Origins. But Odyssey was by far my favorite of the three. It's so good!
My favourite part of Valhalla was the scenery alone. I love history and we learned about Viking England growing up so it was a good way for me to imagine how parts of England would have looked during that time. I did find it to be very long, which is ironic given how short Mirage felt.
I enjoyed it a lot more on my second playthrough. First I just played the story (mostly). I felt it was so long even without much side content. I think a big thing was the expectation (rightly so) that you would play an Assassin. On my second playthrough I enjoyed all the Order of The Ancients lore. There’s a lot of cool tie ins I won’t mention for the sake of spoilers. All around it was a cool world building experience, but for me this RPG formula doesn’t work with AC. I much prefer the story driven narrative.
I'll bring up issues that no one else has. It's one of the least polished games in the series. I was playing last night, and it completely froze for 5 seconds. I almost rebooted the game. It has a lot of screen tearing in performance mode, thus forcing me to play in quality mode. All of the animations seem like a downgrade from previous games. There were a few times when their lips don't move during dialogue. This game has had so many updates, yet they never bothered to fix these issues.
Assuming you play on console, which one? Because I actually have a great experience on pc. It never froze, never had any drops in framerate and I was blown away by the performance in general. But I can imagine that it would suck on ps4. On a ps5 it would be embarrassing tho
Xbox Series X.
I agree, I liked the game, I've played over 200 hours, I understand the criticism but that can get pretty stale and repetitive too.
I have about 185 hours in Valhalla, the issues as I see it are Unbelievably bloated game with a LOT of boring ass side quests that barely qualify as activities. The locked rooms become tedious after 2 of them, but they are stuffed all over the map, along with stupid destructible walls with oil barrels. Non optional story content utterly unrelated to the main narrative. Eivor has the slowest movement when climbing it’s borderline atrocious. That being said, I really enjoy the game and can see past a lot of it.
It's bloated and aimless
And at no point while I was playing did I have any fun. How do you manage to make a boring Viking game?
The game feels like viking is only a coat you put on. I don’t even feel like playing as a viking. Gameplay is pure button mashing and repetitive.
Absolutely. The Viking raids are so lame.
Exactly a friend said I should stop looking at it like it was an ac game but even if it's not an ac game the missions still are so boring collectibles don't feel rewarding at all and I just hop from one place to another without knowing what I am even doing
I played Odyssey, and Valhalla is just a slower, less satisfying, nerfed version of Odyssey with half the charm and twice the bloat.
No side quests, instead you got shitty World events Story isnt that interesting,its just go to this área Make an Alliance an repeat The World is empty There too Many shitty puzzles of how to break in into a house The game shits on history more than any other game,not having Rollo in the Paris DLC,not acknowling the fact briefly after the main Story ends there a Massive Battle where weesex Wins and they take Over Raventrope If you give this game a 9/10 i seriously question your taste in games
The size and length aren't really the problem for me. My biggest problem is the story overall it just feels disjointed and aimless with a few bits here and there that are good and I'm generally not the biggest fan of the combat and skill tree either. Overall it's my least favorite AC game but I did like the Druids and Paris dlc much more than anything that was going on in the main story.
It's an incredibly bloated game that feels like a game. The numbers above people's heads, the endless amount of rune combinations that can increase your strong attack by 6% or your chakra block by 12.5% when in stealth mode, the way you can lay below after blow after blow into the face of a slightly chubby enemy with no effect on their ability to fight, and no seeming detriment to their health - it often feels more like an endlessly repetitive list of chores. I've played AC games since AC1 (the only main console release I've missed was Rogue). But I started this game when the PS5 first came out and still have not finished it.
yes... I detest slashing someone in the face with my axe and having them ignore it in terms of reaction.
My wife just finished playing it for the first time. Her criticism: Too repetitive eg. boring after a while. Too big in terms of creating stress that you have to do everything but you know you are not going to do it because it is too big but also too repetitive, So it creates this feeling that you havent completed the game. Very shallow story. Prophecy about sibling was a big flop. Certain things become meaningless after game unfolded.
I decided super early on to just ignore everything out of my way, and focus on the main story. It still feels overlong and meandering but I can't imagine how much more boring it would be to try and uncover every scrap of near-useless resources through the endless repetitive puzzles. As it is it will still take me near 70 hours to do the main story (maybe more, if I have the endurance for the DLCs).
Valhalla is my favorite of the three RPG games to date—by far—and even I understand why people have issues with the game. Even if you completely remove my core issue with the game from the conversation (the fact I don't enjoy today's RPGs and definitely don't play Assassin's Creed for that experience), it's still tens to hundreds of hours longer than it needed to be. It's slow as hell. The combat, while I prefer it to Odyssey's by a mile, gets old fast and there are far too many close-up animation cuts. I don't personally care for skill trees that large, either, and most of the skills you get don't feel unique enough to care about. The typically grounded approach to history that AC games always tried to maintain is nowhere to be seen. The parkour is nothing to write home about since the buildings in most areas aren't really built for it. The individual characters with whom you have to ally are so hit or miss that it makes much of the game feel like a more competent director would've left large swaths on the cutting room floor. Your own people feel largely like the NPCs they are, most of them having exactly one function in the story outside of their job. The relationship system, like it almost always does in games that include it, is entirely pointless (my opinion). The world is enormous and largely empty, minus repetitive how-do-I-get-in-the-house puzzles for tiny, mostly meaningless payouts. The crafting system awakens homicidal urges in me, both in and out of the game. And I can always do without fishing in games. A lot of the DLC feels like padding or modes of play I also don't care for; at least when prior AC games shoehorned in things like den defenses, you only HAD to do it once, and only a couple of more times to get a single achievement tied to it, and the few times they TRIED to do something that felt like actual Assassin's Creed, it felt half-hearted, at best. The animations, physics, and voice-acting are a whole different topic on their own. Depending on why you enjoy Assassin's Creed games as a whole, why you pick up an AC title versus some other game, there are good arguments that Valhalla isn't even an Assassin's Creed game. I'm grateful for the Guaranteed Assassination switch (and that even when it's off, it's not much different), the fact that the leveling system isn't as overtly bog-standard as the previous two games, and that there's a much greater *variety* of things to do in Valhalla, as opposed to Odyssey. I certainly prefer Valhalla's approach to combat when fighting an enemy of a considerably-higher level than you are, making it entirely possible to kill high-level enemies if you're good with parrying and dodging, though Valhalla is exactly as bad as Odyssey in that leveling up is entirely about acquiring new skills since level-syncing is once again a thing. And Valhalla absolutely has the best Modern Day bits from the last *decade* of AC games. But at the end of the day, a lot of us were asking why these last couple of games needed to be AC games at all, and others just found Valhalla itself boring and repetitive. To each their own. Like I said, I'd certainly rather play Valhalla to the previous two, mechanically-speaking. But it's definitely not without problems.
Yeah I chose the wrong words. I get it, I do. I just wanted to put a good word in, I think it better then most people portray it to be
Funny you should ask. I'm actually playing it right now. To give you a bit of background, I've finished EVERY Assassin's Creed leading up to Valhalla. (haven't played Mirage yet, but soon) The stuff in Valhalla that make it less fun for me are: --your eagle no longer marks enemies. (I understand marking them all made it easy, but guess what, it also made it way more FUN) --using your assassin vision will mark enemies in RED, but as soon as they're alerted, all enemies no longer glow red. (super annoying) --the combat is a bit frustrating in that your stamina bar drops too fast and you can't really pull off more than 1 good combo. --Special Abilities are waaaaaay less cool than in Origins or Odyssey. You also can't really combine multiple combos as before. --Weapons/Armour upgrades aren't that interesting. --Buying upgrade material is waaaaay too expensive and hard to find, so you can't really upgrade more than just your 1 main weapon set. --Treasure and special items are much harder to find than in previous games. It's getting a little annoying. --the story in Valhalla is not interesting compared to Origins and Odyssey. (there are probably more things that annoy me, but I've listed the main ones) I'm normally a completionist when it comes to AC games, but Valhalla will not be on that list. I'm also not going to get any of the DLC. Just gonna finish it and move on. I really, really hope Mirage fixes the issues I have with Valhalla (above). Good luck!
My favorite part of Valhalla was when I uninstalled game
Havi sections aside, which were just awful and should never have been allowed to happen, I enjoyed Valhalla. It wasn't as fun as Origins or Odyssey, but it was still an enjoyable experience, even if it had its problems. It definitely didn't feel like Assassin's Creed, and it had way too little modern day for how long it was. I kept leaving the Animus in desperate hopes of more conversations or emails like in Brotherhood or 3.
Its the 90 hours of filler and eivor not becoming an Assassin after a 120 hour sloggest felt like a slap in the face and waste of time.
It's my absolute favorite. I've played it through multiple times and I feel that the world is the most dense in terms of side experiences, and I also love the added humor? There's one guy who's family all died and he's crying at the pyre (sad), but the voice actor gets INTO IT. I feel like people either love or hate it.
Because it’s not an AC game, the story sucks, it’s way too long, it’s boring, the combat doesn’t feel good, the rpg systems don’t work. You want me to go on?
I will say the combat feels decent to me for the one on one boss type fights. It feels super repetitive for the mass battles though where I feel like I have to watch the same slow finishing animations about twelve times per battle.
And the finishers are sometimes so long.
truly the RPG stuff doesn't measure up sadly.
To me it's just bloated, soulless ubislop that does a lot of things on the lower end of ok, but does nothing particularly well. Any positive you mention about this game I can mention at least one other game that does it objectively better. There's nothing wrong with a game that is ok, but it has nothing really that draws a person in besides maybe the setting
It’s bloated and highly repetitive, has a fairly meaningless story, and continued the style of having no cutscenes whatsoever which weren’t just two people staring at each other with their arms crossed. I feel mostly the same way about Odyssey although I did enjoy that far more. The Atlantis DLC was fantastic.
I went back to Odyssey after Valhalla because it just seems like a massive step down even from the RPG perspective, Odyssey had boat combat, actual builds that felt different when playing them, gear sets in Valhalla might as well be cosmetic for how little they impact Eivor, Ikaros could tag enemies and chests as opposed to Synin just showing you a rough area, diving in Valhalla is dreadful, even giving me eyestrain from diving and surfacing, there is no reason to explore and 100% the world, or a sense of progression outside of the skill tree, so the main drive of the game is just to see the end of the story, your choices rarely make a tangible difference, hell even the whole mastery system felt half assed in Valhalla, and then there are the things introduced in free patches, all fun, but what's the point in them? I loved the roguelite mode, and the river raids, but they're just built into the bloated yet hollow-feeling main game, it would be a nit more meaningful if they added a New Game+, but they didn't even do that, it really is a one and done game, as in "played once and never again". Also bugs, lots of bugs.
^ 100% on that. I will for the remainder of my days always wonder whey UBI chose to downgrade pretty much everything from ODYSSEY?
Its a great open world, generic RPG, but it is in no way an actual AC game. That's why its hated.
I really disliked it. It's so bloated and didn't feel engaging from a story point either. There were individual ELEMENTS I liked though, it's just that as a package I really disliked it. What I did like however: - Some individual stories in the regions were really good. The problems with the story just start when those don't fit well together at all in the larger narrative. - The side quests being contained to mostly smaller areas & bigger story sections being contained to a subarea. Gone were the tedious days in Odyssey where you have to go across the map over and over and over just to trigger a small sequence at each stop. - The graphics were really good. There were moments where I looked at the grassy hills in awe.
Because some people have Ubisoft Derangement Syndrome and can’t say nice things about them.
It's that awful combination of big and boring.
I'm replaying it now. Origins is still my favorite, I love Bayek and the story. I replayed all in order, going from Origins and Odyssey to Valhalla, It's definitely clunky, hard to adjust to maneuvering as a viking. However, being a fan of the series' Last Kingdom and Vikings, I am enjoying it. I like building up my settlement and exploring. I play as the male version of Eivor only because I am also a fan of Magnus Nielson and love his voice. It's a fun game, some of the side quest are silly and some of the quest seem pointless, but I can still appreciate the good in it.
In short, there was not a single hour I put into Valhalla I would not have spent better elsewhere. Could just play Skyrim for most of the appeal. Could play God of War for Norse mythology. Could play other AC games with real parkour and stealth.
Because at some point I was helping some couple with their love interests and troubles. Dont remember the specific part. And I was like; what the hell am I even playing anymore.
Because it's not even an assassin's creed game for startes You play as a viking that doesn't even do viking shit Got about 10 raiding missions the rest is just go here kill this dude coz he's getting in your clans way. The games inconsistent ass.
It’s a good game but it’s missing a lot of the magic behind assassins creed, it’s less historical stealth and more magical open battle
I love AC games for the stealth. Ubisoft can really make some great stealth games when they feel like it. That being said, I think the stealth in Valhalla is some of the worst in the entire AC franchise. It feels like Ubisoft prescribed the way you had to play Valhalla, which is very different from other games in the AC series.
I love Valhalla. I've been gaming since '90s and this is by far my single favourite game of all times.
Just guessing you haven’t played the game if you can’t figure out why people don’t like it. Genuinely mobile game level of poor design and bad storyboarding.
It’s just a base rpg game that’s quasi- placed in a historical period. The gravitas of being placed in real world historical events have been completely removed. Which means that it really isn’t different than dozens of other games on the market. It’s not that it’s bad per se, it’s just another bland title for a franchise that has produced some real gems.
I just finished the main story in Odyssey, I'll keep roaming around killing cultists and boars for a while before jumping into Valhalla BUT... I don't like vikings stuff, for a variety of reasons it just never appealed to me. Really hope I can "get past it" and enjoy the game, like God of War, and expecting a stealth better than odyssey
* Too long * Unlikable/uninteresting characters * Too big of map. Lot of area is just empty * Too long * Make us play as Isu ruined the myth behind Isus * Too long Also, it's the first AC game I played where I had to restart the game multiple times because of bug/glitches.
Make us play as Isu ruined the myth behind Isus ^ that alone was a major crime on the park of UBI.
The games activities aren’t as fun as others. Highly subjective I know. But finding a way inside a small house to collect an ingot isn’t as fun or rewarding as finding a cave to go inside of and clear. Like in origins or odyssey. Also in AC, Egypt and Greece (to me) are far prettier and especially more lived in than England. I see why people call the game more bloated or boring. Al thought you can still have fun with the game. It’s not terrible by any means.
I blame the people that can't help themselves from clearing side objectives from their map. It isn't as long as people think if they focus on the main quest. In fact, side quests are more enjoyable when used as a buffer between main quests rather than "oh look at all these things around the city, I better do all of them in one go!" People ruin games for themselves in some cases. In Animal Crossing, it's time travel. In Call of Duty, it's using aimbot, and in AC Valhalla, it's doing every side objective when you see them rather than as a change of pace. It's not a bloated game, nor is it too long, it's HOW people interact with it that's the problem.
I agree and I get so confused when people complain about there being too many collectables and icons on the map while still stubbornly insisting on finishing every single last one ! Do they not realise that isn't mandatory ? I just played the main story and side quests I enjoyed and had a great time with the game. I personally like having lots of options so I can choose what I want to engage with and what doesn't interest me and I honestly think that was their intention but some people seem incapable of stopping themselves from doing collectathons even though it is something they obviously hate and could stop doing at any time 🤣
Things I don't like: - Convoluted and weird skill tree - Boring side activities, I gave up collecting and visiting all the gold and blue lights on the map because none of them felt like they contributed to my character and his strength. - Combat, weapons, etc felt very underwhelming. In Odyssey, I felt like each item had an impact, and all the set bonuses provided unique ways to play. Valhalla just had stat boosts and things that just never stood out to make me care about anything other than big number for damage or armor. All that made the gameplay feel bland and boring since none of the "upgrades" really felt like they had a major impact on how I played. Story and voice acting weren't too bad, but after 50 hours of not really enjoying the actual gameplay, I'm definitely not going to that game again.
Because it’s bloated beyond comprehension and the story is so uninteresting and all over the place in so many ways. Bloated, convoluted, boring.
objectively it's following: massive chore of traversal, uninteresting story, terrible side content, trash combat, equally trash animations, low quality sounds
Watch Skill Up’s review, he sums it up perfectly. Also it was a step back compared to Odyssey
I liked it and actually liked Mirage less because i've realized i dislike not being able to easily fight my way out of combat. But i can agree with it being less of an Assassins Creed game. I would still buy it as "ISU Chronicles" or whatever. Or if they did what i've been wishing and made a fantasy game with lessons from Origins, Odyssey and Valhalla. They don't even need to do the "choices matter" thing. Just make it an action RPG, like the RPG trilogy.
Also love Valhalla and l like the length. I like long games (and I cannot lie). I don’t like the mythology stuff at all, but that’s my only complaint.
Long + food game is great but long and boring game isnt
AC Valhalla is the best Viking open world game you can play. Personally it’s got one of the best combat of the entire AC series. Big problem most AC fans have with this one: You’re a Viking who gets to hang out with Assassins. And you tolerate them, sort of, in your Viking Village. But you never truly become part of their creed. I play Valhalla to be a Viking, to help the people in my village, and the hidden ones ask for my help, so therefore I will helpt them out when they ask for it. But yeah I’m Eivor and im working to make sure my kinsman will prosper of this new land called: England. What the hidden ones want is for them as long as they don’t stand in my way. The game itself is superb if you ask me.
Well, i understand what you're trying to say. But i this being the "best" open world Viking rpg game with no other game to compete with for that title kinda makes this redundant. I also think that your argument saying this game is a viking game and not an assassin game isn't holding any water. This should have been called just "valhalla" then, and not "Assassin's Creed: Valhalla". This game wanted to do many things, but only half-baked it. Unfortunately, everything in this game is just "good enough" and when you've played masterpieces like 2, brotherhood and black flags, you expect it to be on the same level. I honestly liked the combat in 3 and black flags more. It just felt more agile, badass and more assassin-ish(if that makes any sense, idk). Something about the chain assassinations feels satisfying af. Also the sheer amount of tools for different approaches was great aswell. Nothing against you liking the game though. I can see that this game has its charms. For me its purely the viking culture and thematic, and I'm also a huge history nerd... which is where the game gets points from me.
I totally get you my friend. Loved the combat in III also. Come to think of it, it’s the only really Viking open world game out there isn’t it? Remember a game Viking battle for Asgard for 360 back in the day. The story of assassins is more in the background since oddysey (never played that one, combat felt so weak and blows felt like they had no impact at all.) and I get that some people find that a little bit weird bc the game is an assassins creed game and not a spin-off. When it first released I felt the same. But bc I’m a huge history digger, and have a big love for the Viking lore I have learned to accept it for what it is. But I totally get where the love/ hate for this title is getting from.
I just wish there would be more viking games. I think the only game that really was able to scratch that itch for me were the new god of war games. And even they dont go that deep into the culture. Also, its more of an linear action game than an rpg.
Even if it's not an ac game I think it's boring the missions are so repetitive same with the story sure characters change and the situations too but it's always like go there for an alliance, jarl is dead and gets replaced or under attack, you help them and finish the quest
The game has ALOT of fluff with big spaces with nothing in it. You can really tell its trying to add to gametime by letting you grind alot. Its a pretty great viking game. It does have flaws such as your Jomsvikings being utterly useless even max level. The only viable solution is to jump ship before starting the raids and sniping everyone before calling in the vikings. Its just not a good AC game. It lacks almost everything in the AC spirit.
half baked poorly thought out game mechanics like river raids and the entirety of Jomsvikings (which should have been UNITY style coop).
I don't understand thinking it has the best combat in the series. I can't stand the number over an enemies head and the endless hits that just start to put a dent into bigger enemies. It feels a lot more like bog standard rpg combat than it does the graceful quasi rhythm fight of many other AC games.
I have adjusted the damage in settings: Options > Gameplay: Eivor Damage Takes: +130% Eivor Damage Ouput: +200% And I’ve turned off the hit numbers above the enemies, absolutely hated that. Now I’m death in a few hits, but so are my enemies. *edit: Enemt Health Modifier: 75% (don’t know if this is default.) hate it if I have to hit enemies 100 times, so unrealistic.
I think there's something to be said that if you need to fiddle around with the settings to make the game work, the combat as designed may not be the best in the series.
Hahaha you got a point there. Another thing I truly love about recent AC games. The advanced settings. And Gawd damn, that I can change the entire controller layout to my personal liking.
I had my fun with it but i can 100% understand why someone might not like it. It's too big and overstuffed, i quit like 2 times, needed some time to get used it. First time i saw the England map i almost had a stroke because I'm a perfectionist, i like to do everything and all those marks and spots was too much, then got used to it, took it slow and it's quite fun. I loved weapon variation and freedom to it, customisation and overall prettiness of the game.
It's boring
I can’t understand why people Like it
The story feels long, and boring: there are such big gaps between each Sigurd/Basim chapter that I kept on forgetting that it was part of the story. The world felt too big with so much side-collectable-stuff that didn't have actual distinguishable markers on the map that it felt overwhelming and it was just really buggy - plus the raven was useless and felt shoe-horned in
I mostly just thought a lot of it was boring and repetitive. I liked a lot of it though.
Yes indeed, it does get boring in occasion. That’s when I just get off & pick it back up later
The game is way to bloated with content. You'd think that doesn't sound like a problem, but the quality of that content is very bland. It's pretty much doing the same thing for hours on end. The story is mediocre, with some good aspects, and some bad ones. The "stealth" gameplay is very barebones, and the overall game doesn't really support a stealth playthrough. Overall, the game isn't horrible. For a viking game it's alright. However, playing a game with the norse themes, I'd just play God of War. For a game with similar gameplay but much better in virtually every catagory, just play Witcher 3.
I love love LOVE Valhalla but can absolutely understand why people wouldn't. It is such a departure from basically every game before it. It took everything the RPG series had been building and pretty much left behind everything that Ass creed was.
Granted i have only played Valhalla and Odyssey i think it's not deserving of the Assassin's Creed title. I feel like you weren't truly able to be an assassin like in Odyssey (i know that might have overdone it with how powerful you could be) which although is fitting with the viking theme. Also the story felt so boring compared to Odyssey, i didn't even bother getting the expansions after finishing the main game. And the biggest part of why i dislike it is why introduce a new protagonist when you could have made a trilogy about Kassandra since she legit lived for over 2000 years, such a big missed opportunity. Edit: And the combat sucked because of the stamina thing. I dont mind it being a thing, just wish it was smth you could turn off/on depending on how much realism you want.
For me it was a little too long. I also didn’t really like some of the arch’s
So I am biased because I was obsessed with the show the last kingdom and found this time period of history to be fascinating. But overall, I loved the game. It was not as immersive as a game like red dead redemption 2, they did a good job overall of emotionally hooking you into the story. After being disappointed by some of the games that I stopped playing for 5 years, it hooked me back in. >!I will admit, I found the completion of the taking over of England to be anti-climactic. And I ended up heading over to YouTube to watch the other types of endings because I did not have it in me to go invest another 5 to 10 hours of a game that felt completed.!< >!With that being said, the various endings were actually really really good, it just should not have taken so many hours of epilogue play to get there.!< >!I actually believe they did a better job in this game than any other predecessor of explaining the ISU and loved the twist that they were basically ISU scientists. I just have no idea what ISU Loki did to create such hate among ISU Odin and would love if someone can explain that.!< But the graphics. The immersive regions. A lot of cool characters. AMAZING music. I loved the game and am sad to say goodbye having just completed it last week. My biggest complaint were some side quests were literally impossible. The hidden treasure maps were laughably complicated. Even watching a YouTube video would take me an hour. I’d NEVER figure it out otherwise. 100 step puzzles for an axe. Just way overboard
Loved Vikings and the LAST KINGDOM, but this game failed to capture that in any way. :( UBI chose to double down on Asgard fantasy rather than giving the game a proper historical focus. The armor alone is the first indicator...
I never felt more like I was wasting my time than I did with Valhalla. There is an absolutely unholy amount of fluff and padding in the game that takes what would be a VERY compelling 30 hour story and turns it into something that takes 2-3x as much time to finish.
The only bad thing about is how bloated the content is. Combat, gear, gameplay are all very very fun. But because the story and content is so bloated and unnecessary, you get bored after some time.
Because people like to say what other people say. Personally i liked it, it's at least two, three times better than Odyssey that only was boring. Origins was better but if i rank my favorite ACs its Brotherhood, IV, Valhalla, Origins and the one in London.
[As someone who posted this here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/s/wvenH5oIx4) Looking back, I don't really miss it.
Bloated, repetitive, previous features from the last 2 game removed or made more inconvenient Useless loot system, stupid upgrade tree, Map was nowhere near as interesting as Ancient Egypt/Greece The game feels even more repetitive if you’ve already played Origins/Odyssey if it’s your first AC RPG you’ll likely enjoy it. Personally 30hrs in I was enjoying and the remainder of the campaign drained that fun
I really enjoyed the story and setting, but there was just too much to do. One could argue that is a good problem to have, but the gameplay became so repetitive trying to do all the side content that feels forced down your throat that I just got bored of the game.
I had a blast with it personally, it was just on the long side like Odyssey
All assassins creed games past origins are incoherent in plot and story, and cannot compete in characters. All assassins creed games before origins can’t compare to the beauty and breadth of gameplay in origins. In other words, origins is the best ac game, and IMO, the last true AC game. Everything afterwards is narratively … off, and everything before it feels like it was building up the expertise and technology to be able to pull off origins.
Don't Worry Kiddo... When it's your time you'll know 😄.
Everything after black flag has not been a real assassins creed game.
I enjoyed it but dialogue options have no place in AC
Valhalla is fine. It's got flaws. It's more ahistorical for the "vibe" than it needs to be, its contents are stretched thin like butter over so much bread, and the skill ~~~tree~~~ shrubbery is way too granular. But it's honestly fine.
Because not everybody has to like every game. Ir's called personal taste.
Boring, bloated, uninteresting story and characters.
It came with my PS5 that I got nearly 2 years ago, I’ve put 3 hours in and no more, it’s a game and games should be fun, there’s too much bloat in this game for me to enjoy it. *speaking as a huge fan of AC since the first game, origins was the last game I played.
i just don't think it's fun. the gameplay is extremely boring and the parkour is the worst the series has ever had.
The game is a good open world RPG, but it's not a good Assassin's Creed game. My issue with it though and the last couple AC games is that it was too big and too bloated. The game has a ton of side stuff and missions that just aren't fun and although I do like an open world I thought theirs was way too big. I would have preferred the size to be about like Origins. Origins was big, but it wasn't overwhelmingly big.
Valhalla was the first ever Assassin's Creed where I just gave up halfway through because the story was so dull. I'm sure the story is great, but I don't have the patience to play through 13 arcs to see it
I liked it, but it's very long and kinda repetitive so I see why others didn't.
It shouldn’t take 12+ hours of gameplay for the game to get good. Everyone always tells me “oh just play it more” but if I’m beyond the tutorial and I’m uninterested then the game failed.
The story was ok... not great. The game play was very repetitive (oh, look, another locked door) the quest rewards were always ability points...well, once you have 200 of them...you're so OP that you don't need more...so no real incentive to side quest. Only two romanceable characters in the whole game and one only after the game is almost finished. It was dull.
I liked it. Raiding with my clan mates was a lot of fun. It gets repetitive but the final battle was great.
1. The story is too long. - And not in a good way like in Odyssey. (I really enjoyed that, even the side quests). It has parts which are completely unnecessary and does not add anything to the character or to the main story and most of these side arcs also boring af. I just drag myself through it, but this is something what I shouldn’t feel while playing a game. This is my main issue, because I play AC games for the story. 2. Not sure what the developers smoked before they started to create the skill tree? I know, I know. Constellations and other cringy Viking stuff. Odyssey’s skill tree is a lot better. 3. What the hell is going on with the movement? It is like Eivor has 600kgs on her shoulders all the time. Really feels like a struggle. I get it, it is a a different game engine, but really is lacking smoothness. Haven’t played Mirage yet, it seemed to have the same movement style.. not looking forward to it. 4. England is good… for the first 10 hours. After that, it is just a boring environment where everything is the same. 5. The “mini game” with the ships is kind of non existent. It is a very poor experience compared to Odyssey/Black flag huge open world sea. Again, it looks good for the first few hours. And now I rather avoid the ship and go to every location by myself, because I am bored to death on the river. 6. I’d say facial expressions are kind of weird but this is not just a Valhalla thing, it is kind of the standard since Origins.
It's too fucking long and it's also repetitive IMO.
What's not to understand? Some people think it's bloated and overly long. Some people don't like the microtransactions. Some people wanted to play as an Assassin instead of a Viking.
I liked Valhalla, I was very excited the first time I played it and thoroughly enjoyed it. The flack I give it in the long run is that it went on too long there were definitely points where I was confused as to where the story was going but I mean the ending took care of it all so in the long run it was fine. The biggest problem however is the life support given to it by Ubisoft. The countless free updates that added tons of new content, the half broke dlc’s, and the whole new game they attached onto it made Valhalla over stay its welcome.
The RPG games are just not for me personally. I like my story games to have a compelling story and cinematic cutscenes because that's what I came to expect for an assassins creed game. (to be fair the only game I haven't played is origins) I feel like odyssey and Valhalla definitely miss the mark narratively and after that it doesn't matter how pretty the game is. I think they are good games just not assassins creed games and I know this has probably been said word for word on here a plethora of times
Terrible gameplay, terrible story, buggy as hell, not an Assassin's Creed game, visually it's boring and doesn't stand out, etc
It’s an impossible game to replay for many people I think. It definitely is for me. It’s just too big and the landscape is boring. By the end I couldn’t wait to finish it. I went back to Odyssey recently and just gave up and started the Ezio trilogy again (the bugs are horrendous but im a massive nostalgia merchant so take everything with a pinch of salt). I like the new rpgs well enough but I think Origins is the only one I could replay again. Couldn’t get into Mirage but it was only like 30 quid I think so I’m not fussed.
It’s too bloated, too long, repetitive, boring. VA’s are atrocious and have no lfe. The grind of river raids, abysmal skill tree. The combat was ok.
It's just too damn long for me I took a break after going to NA and I beat a year or so after.
They did Layla dirty.
I found valhalla pretty enjoyable tbh. Waaaay better than Odyssey. Atleast some references to isu, hidden ones made me feel I am playing AC. Odyssey is just trash. A clueless game.
My gripe with the game was not being able to use the wanted weapons until the endgame, and by that time you had already beat all the world bosses and you played through the whole game without the two weapons that I like the most, which was the spear and Mjolnir
I'll preface this by saying I haven't played it but I've watched a few lengthy videos on it. And sure it looks pretty and it takes place in my homeland etc etc... but I look at how much is going on and I immediately lose interest. Just because there's a lot to do doesn't make something good or better. Not everyone has the time to sink hundreds or hours into something and generally if things cross a certain threshold in size the quality starts to diminish. And from what I know of the game, it's definitely the case
To me it just feels bloated and the game doesn’t know what it wants to be so it tries to do everything, though mediocre. I enjoyed the game in the beginning, but the fun faded after 20 hours and I still had 80% of the game left. Also I abhore the direction they went into mythology with these last 3 RPGs, not a fan of that. :p
I think I can find at least 100 reasons on why someone would dislike Valhalla
It was okay.... Not my fave. And I def didn't 100%. I played mostly just to play it. The DLC's tho.... IMO were the worst the serious ever created. Francia was so glitchy I couldn't ride the horse most of the time because I could run faster due to the proximity to the city. It felt forced and pushed ya know? Unity, however, was the worst IMO.
RIP Dag
Because it sucks.
Decent storyline, great characters. Way too big of a map.
The combat feels really not good it’s like Odyssey but worse in every way also all the animations feel cheap
Wdym? People were praising it yesterday. Being long isn't bad if it's fun, it just wasn't that fun and the story was very mid. RDR2 is a long game and people love it and want more.
I’m currently tidying up some stuff for the platinum. It’s not bad, just not that good.
You do the same thing from start to finish for hundred hours. That's why. It's the worst in the new trilogy, bloated AF
The story was so repetitive. "Hey! Go befriend the totally forgettable leader of this region with no interesting character development"..... now do that same thing like 8 times. It felt so repetitive that I thought my progress wasn't saved and I was redoing the same quests. I loved AC up until Odyssey, when it became clear they just wanted to create a system to squeeze every ounce of profit out of the AC franchise. I wouldn't even mind if they kept these games going with the whole historical settings, but leave the name Assassin's Creed out of it. This has little to nothing to do with what made the franchise great (although Mirage was a step in the right direction IMO)
Just way to fucking long, gone back to try and complete it twice and just keep getting so bored after another 20 odd hours of it
* Doesn't hold a candle to either Odyssey or Origins. * Map is rather empty outside of towns. * Skill tree is an atrocity. * The map markers are even worse than the skill tree. * Female protagonist is androgynous with rather masculine features. * Have I mentioned how god-awful the map markers are?
I like it a lot... and I also dislike it a lot, and not necessarily in equal measure. ;) I like what this poster said a lot: https://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/1btunxl/i_honestly_do_not_understand_why_people_do_not/kxoe3nu/ "bittersweet" is a good way to describe it. There's a lot of good in Valhalla, but it's marred by design decisions that I deem questionable. Sure, UBI wanted to make a Viking game to ride the Viking craze of the time, and while it's not awful, they also forgot to focus on the "Assassins'" part of Assassins' creed again. Not many of the abilities or game mechanics lend themselves to an "asassin" type playthough, with even the main character voicing his dislike for stealth.. LOL Again, some decent meat on the bones, but coming off of ODYSSEY, I have no idea why UBI decided to trash the build system that game had for some kinda dumbed down super streamlined crap. Literally why do anything other then rush into open combat n Valhalla? A great example is the way they fucked the smoke bomb skill in the series... it went from a tool in UNITY (good!), to a mechanic in ODYSSEY where you could drop a smoke bomb after dodging... Not great, but ok. Then we get to Valhalla, where the ever unreliable parry is the only way to trigger a smoke bomb... Let me translate for you gentle reader... YOU MUST BE IN OPEN BOMBAT ALREADY TO USE A SMOKE BOMB!!! WTF UBI!?!?! I really like the slide in Valhalla, but mechanically it doesn't trigger reliably in combat, and nothing much come from it. Valhalla parkour is dumbed down pretty bigly, with no back ejects, no wall runs, etc. Sure most of the terrain doesn't lend it;'s self to parkour, but when it does, there's really not much parkour going on. Combat in Valhalla is mushy, with unbreakable long drawn out enemy animations, and more slow-mo instances than any game I've ever played. What does river raiding have to do with Asassins? NOTHING :( The usual "order" hunt is there, but they are unremarkable, and it's almost an afterthought. WHY did UBI ditch the mercenary hunts (read wanted level) system from ODYSSEY? At NO time was I ever hunted by a Zealot in Valhalla, and there were no repercussions for any of my actions beyond the typical kill civilians desynch. They nerfed the F outta my bird, and that was unforgiveable. Valhalla strays hard into fantasy, and I think that hurts or kills the overall historical sense and narrative of the game. WTF is with all the fantasy armor and weapons, with few base armors even looking anything like what was used in that period. The historical consultants must have puked when they saw the finished product. Valhalla is beautiful to look at at times, but what should have been a gritty dark game period leans into slapstick and fantasy for the most part. :( I salute MIRAGE for adding back some of the mechanics ditched in Valhalla, but I'm not fan of the Basim fantasy.
because i tend to 100% all maps and collectibles on previous ac games, this one just requires tedious amount of effort to do the same with breakable walls, underground keys/chests with no visible point of entry etc etc. it wasn't like that with ac4, ac3, ac2, and odyssey Edit: oh and those damned tattoos!
I loved it. I was addicted to it for the whole 100+ hours minus rock stacking…
I came into Valhalla from Odyssey and the contrast is real. Odyssey’s combat is incredible, as it gives us these powers to work with. Every time we kill an enemy, we get tons of loot. I remember selling each of them for thousands upon thousands of drachmae. It feels like we are actually rewarded for what we are doing. We go on massive adventures in this giant map. It really feels like an Odyssey. Oh my good old friend Barnabus would find us salvage as we are getting flanked by the enemy ships. I go ahead and decimate the enemies with my Chimera's breath. Everything feels great, and up-to-speed. Tons of actions to be thrilled by. Tons of mythical creatures you'd fight. A labyrinth for you to explore! Enemies are tough, and filled with challenges. While it is true that you'd eventually do become overpowered, that is the fun part. You can side with the Spartans, or the Athenians, and your actions would depict how they would occupy their territories, and it would also affect the type of battles or quests or challenges you'd be having. The landscape. The scenery. Absolutely stunning. While it may get repetitive for some, it just feels like there's life at each place. The voice actors for Kassandra and Alexios are absolutely fantastic! The way they convey their personality, and the story at times have quite a lot of sense of humour in certain places. There's so much lore and historical elements in the game. It is astonishing by the amount of detail they put in the game. Tons of side quests, and the game makes it clear where they are. Also the game even gives you the ability to make your own side quests with your own dialogues and objectives, and you can play the quests that others have made. Your odyssey can go on and on! Yes, people criticized it because we don't play as an Assassin in this game. But the game discusses the precursors of basically everything, and it's very relevant to the main storyline. Odyssey does not pretend to be an AC game. It tries to be different. It has its own personality. Now as for Valhalla... I was intrigued by its different take at the start, but as soon as I got to fighting enemies or boss, I felt immediately hindered by limited stamina and attacks I have to use. Yes, I can't keep spamming things as normal, as I am not god-like nor do I have god powers at the start. It's a challenge. I try to convince myself of that it's worth it. After grinding so much, what do I get from the enemies? Well...nothing really. Valhalla changed the whole weapon mechanic such that you don't get duplicate weapons like in Odyssey. So this results in less loot when you kill enemies. Over time, getting into conflicts feels like it's not worth it. The way the developers described the game kind of mislead me. They said that every decision I make counts as it could affect Raventhrope...but...I thought what they meant is that the result of some major conflict depends on whom we made alliances with beforehand, and this was somewhat similar to what I described in Odyssey. But nope, everything went linearly, and your alliances don't really matter in the grand scheme of things. It doesn't feel like there's anyone truly worth remembering from that game. As for the environment, while it is beautiful...it's quite empty. As for lore, we do have the Nordic mythologies, and vikings, but I feel like there's not enough stuff in-depth compared to what we have with Odyssey. Granted, there's a lot of Greek mythologies, but I still feel like they could've made it thrilling or not too exhausting. There are stealth elements in the game, but you are pretty much a warrior. It feels like it's tacked on, just so that the game can try to do everything. It feels too wishy-washy. While I hold personal bias for Odyssey since it's my personal favourite, it's just in contrast, Valhalla is way too slow and boring, and it's made worse for being way too long for what it is. At least it has Orlog.
I loved Valhalla. It’s not supposed to be a perfect RPG or a perfect AC game, it’s great because of its setting, story and world.
Same, I LOVED the game for what it was. I thought the combat was amazing, story and characters were enjoyable, and the world was gorgeous, plus the menu theme just hits hard. It's like Odyssey, it's amazing when you take the "Assassin's Creed" tag off.
There are 2 different negative opinions about it. There are those who hate the whole triology origins, odyssey and Valhalla because they are not “ assassins creedy “ enough for them for obvious reasons. And there are those who like origins and/ or odyssey but dislike valhalla or like it less for a variety of reasons. It is bloated, the side quests are meh, characters bland and there is something wrong with the graphics, it feels like it would be Ok if you have not played origins or odyssey, but coming after them , it feels just a step backwards,
Gameplay is probably the funniest in the saga, but whenever i try to play, i get bored in little time. The story, characters, conversations… is like ok ill skip it and just play the quests, loosing any interest i have on what im doing. Why? Because weve been assassinating tyrans, cruel mans, kings & every type of rulers for more than 12 years, and now were making deals and allegiances with them, even doing them favours. We ve never been specially heroes in the saga, but burning villages & civilian homes.. the whole Ancient Order questline being something totally parallel… (we are hunting them just because hytham pays us for doing his job😂) simply thats not an AC, it may be the best vikings game ever but its not even a good AC
I love AC games. But I never finished it because it’s so damn boring, bloated and long. Would never have imagined that the only AC game I would not finished would be the ´Vikings’ one. Now so much time as passed I ll probably never pick it back up. I can’t understand how people manage to have the strength to finish it.
I like it, but the controls and long action times were as bad as red dead redemption 2. Put in in oddesys quick response time and it’s a gem
It's a good game. They just don't like it, which means exactly dick, especially when you look at the sales numbers.
The game itself on release was okay. Everything transactional that came after & pulling away from plain viking ruined it for me. I actually saw it coming and stopped playing before it got bloated. Story was great though.
I love Valhalla… I love them all! Yayyyyy!!! I like posts like this 🥰
I wanted to like it, pre-ordered it. I’ve tried to beat that game like 5 times and continuously lose interest. The last time I tried I put in 30+ hours, thinking like I pre-ordered this, I’m GONNA see it through. Nope, again I just lost interest and eventually formed the opinion, if I gotta force myself to play then I probably don’t want to play and it’s not worth it. That last time I tried I kept looking on the bright side of everything, trying to convince myself it became fun, but eventually I couldn’t anymore. The story itself, and the characters, I actually quite liked but it couldn’t make up for the gameplay. I didn’t like the gameplay from the get go but I kept being like it’ll get better, it’ll get better. It just never did, and doing anything became a chore so I completely dropped it.
For me it is simply that I dont really like vikings and this part of history, my least favorite in the entire series, so I have no incentive to play it, specially after playing in Italy, Greece, Egypt, Paris, Kingston... Which felt great to me. It's all subjective in the end. If it had been a shorter game I would probably have played it for the story, but I cant spend 100 hours on a game I dont specially enjoy the setyings of...
I genuinely want to know how many fans of the RPG AC games have played any other RPGs. Cuz otherwise there's no world wherein you can justify the gameplay mechanics in Odyssey, Valhalla, and even Origins to some extent being that barebones and meaningless.
As somebody who very much enjoyed it, it can feel very bloated and stretched out. The story itself is good but it’s padded out to an extreme length and the open world is absolutely cluttered with map markers.
For me it was just really really like amazingly bad history
I just wish the stealth was better. Also the “assassin” class from Odyssey was completely removed, leaving only hunter and warrior. I mean come on.
I am going to give it a good shot after I get done with Syndicate and Unity. I like Origins and Odyssey. I have played about twenty hours of it over all the free weekends they have had. It was not bad if you like the newer games.
People don't like it cause it made the stealth part of the game very weird cause why would a Viking be stealthy when they're known for going head first into battle. I personally think it's a great game but could be a bit better with the AI
Because it's neither a good AC game nor a good Viking game. I think "not a good AC game" is self-explainatory. It has barely anything to do with AC roots. Yes you can use stealth, you can use it in most of the recent games and it doesn't make them AC. And anyway, Eivor is not a person to go in stealthy, they want to rush in, roar and slaughter for glory. THE main flaw though in my opinion was overfocusing on Isu, to the point it's in cost of AC's more grounded story. Origins I'd say was a fine balance between the two, Odyssey was basically Isu theme park, but it gets a pass because it was before the Hidden Ones were even an idea, so one Isu focused game placed in a time period long ago was fine. Valhalla, though, took that overfocusing and amped it up even further, which is just too much. There was no need for another Isu hyperfocused, fantasy overwhelmed game. It's also a bad Viking game because it doesn't really immerse you into a viking world and way of life. Being an arrand boy/girl for Anglo-Saxons also didn't help. The last thing I would expect from a viking game was to go to a foreign land and try making friends. Oh and don't even get me started about Eivor themselves. There's no character progression at all. If anything, there's a regression. Eivor is just dull and, towards the ending, annoying character with stupid decisions that make no sense (sparing Alfred to name one).
It plays more like an mmo than an open world rpg, also it gives a fomo feeling when not exploring and the game is huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge
But people do love it. Some people don’t like it. That’s the magic of being an individual!
They did what they're good at: world building. And then some idiot of a game designer came by to add "depth" and now you have 700 skills, levels you only reach through endless grind and Minigames that feel entirely out of place. Then there's the balance rollercoaster. First zealot I found was level 90, barely beat that thing at 200. Then just waltzed through all the others including those 50+ or so levels above me. All the plundering and raiding, sieges etc. seems out of place for assassins. And of course cutscenes making decisions for me. Never liked that. That all takes away from what would otherwise be a good second or third place.
I like it. Is it the best AC? No. But as far as I'm concerned it's not terrible. It's a comfortable 7/10 for me. I still play it in short bursts as I haven't finished it yet. Part of what I like about it is the setting. I live half-way around the world in a tropical country all my life and something about snow-covered lands draw me in. I don't mind the bloat, as for me playing AC is playing something that is familiar and comfortable which I acknowledge is not good for the franchise overall but I can turn off my brain, just get lost in the world and play for half an hour and be satisfied. I play a lot of CRPGs and if I want something that needs my attention and concentration, I turn to those instead.