Games

It's decent, but a large departure from the previous games.

You'll be doing a lot of levelling up in order to progress. Assassinations on more powerful enemies won't be guaranteed kills.

It's a lot more RPG-lite than the other games.

I think Odyssey was better, and very similar in structure. The only problem is it's so long I don't even want to look at another AC game for a while, and it was a few years ago that I played it. They all look very much the same now.

If you are interested in ancient Egypt, hell yeah

Nope. Full of repetitive busywork, unnecessary shoehorned RPG mechanics, and completely forgettable writing/story/voice acting.

I hate stealth games and didn't like the AC series until Origins started the "Witcher 3 wannabe" style of AC games. All 3 of the ones released so far (Origins, Odyssey, Valhalla) have been like crack for me - I can't stop playing them until I've been to every icon on the map. If you like open world action RPGs and Ancient Egypt, you'll probably like it. If you prefer stealth like the older AC games, though, you might not.

I liked it better than Odyssey but less than... whatever the one before it. I forget.

I did a little assassin creed run this summer. Started with Unity and went to Odyssey.

Unity by far has the best story-line. The game mechanics are also more focused on being an assassin, not a brawler. Sneak and stab, drop smoke and disappear when you get in trouble.

Syndicate - they changed the focus to more brawling. However the mechanics were pretty bad and the storyline was predictable and stupid to say the least. You can still play the assasin for most of it if you want.

Origins - They went all out into brawling with this one. Complicated all of the controls. Easiest way to make it through the game is as an archer. The story lines are dull and some are just plain weird. The offer you tons of different options in gear but only a few are worth keeping. Not much chance to actually assainate anyone. Lots of weird half baked stuff like the naval warfare in the story line but nowhere else.

Odyssey - it's basically the same as origins. They spent more time fleshing out the mechanics. Added in a ton of options but you only use a few. Added in a ton more brawling combat and very little assassination. In many instances trying to play as an assassin is just not possible. The combat is often broken. Beating the bosses is all the same. Spam arrows while dodging until they weaken, get a hit in and run away- repeat. Save often because the game crashes regularly.

Yes I played all the way through and beat the main quests and side quest on all of them.

As a background, I loved the Ezio games and also enjoyed AC3 somewhat. I also love open world RPGs in general. But I hate grinding and mandatory generic side quests.

I tried it years ago, but did not like it and stopped playing after some hours. Assassinations via sneaking up and one-shotting were not possible AFAIR, which ruined the fun on assassinations for me. RPG mechanics like leveling and skills were present, but were designed in a way that added nothing of value to the experience while requiring a boring grind. There were many side quests, but they felt boring and generic and. I could have overlooked these things and concentrated on the main story, but engaging in the level grind and the generic side quests was to a large degree mandatory to be able to continue the story. That made me feel like I'm wasting my time and made me stop playing.

Overall I felt that the game tried to find some compromise between story-based action adventure and open-world RPG, but just ended up combining the worst of both worlds. It felt like the RPG features were pushed in top-down ("everyone is doing open world, levels and skill trees now, we should put that in the game") without any regard to WHY these features work well in some games and how they have to be integrated in order to make the experience more fun.

I played it, but personally it didn't stick for me.

I might need to give it another go, but when I see a mission called:

"Kill Animal"

It feels half-assed to me

Refinement wise origins is to Fallout 3 and Odyssey is to New Vegas.

I liked Origins. Tomb exploration. History lessons. Angry hippos. It was solid.

Odyssey is my favorite of the 3. Worth it.

Valhalla was too long. They took the Odyssey formula and just did too much. Normally I completionist games, but I could not finish those repeatable side quests. Odin’s marathon runs among other things. After Valhalla I had no interest in buying Mirage and doing it again.

It's alright, but I couldn't get through it. It just was #notmyAC lol. Travel between quests took too long and the desert is not that interesting to me personally. Parcour was shallow and I hated the combat and progression systems.

I loved almost all of the old school style AC games, but they started to drop off after the Ezio trilogy. 3, Black Flag, Unity and Syndicate were fine, but they just didn't quite have the same charm or were lacking in other areas. Still had a fun time with Black Flag and Syndicate.

I don't know, I refuse to play Ubisoft games.

I found it very relaxing and enjoyable. Excellent escapism. I don't particularly care for the RPG mechanics but I put up with them for the rest of the experience.

The story is good, the gameplay very good, and the visuals absolutely stunningly wonderful. I recommend it without reservations

I enjoyed it. It's definitely a different feel than previous AC games, so if you go in hoping for that, you might be disappointed. I think it's definitely worth checking out, especially if you can get it on sale.

I love Origin's story especially the Curse of the Pharoh DLC. Especially compared to Odyssey.

Haven't played Origins, but I've spent a lot of time with Odyssey which has my highest recommendation.

From a friend who's opinion I trust, I've been told Origins is the less fleshed out version of Odyssey. He says that Origins started Assassin's Creed on a new RPG focused track that really just worked for Origins and Odyssey (he claims they biffed Valhalla).

I enjoyed it just fine. I enjoy open-worldish-rpg-y games.

I think Odyssey refined the mechanics better, but Origins was still enjoyable. One the post-main DLCs I particularly liked (which is rare for me).

I did not/do not enjoy in the least the modern-day story detours nonsense; I just sort of think of them as commercial breaks that I go get some water during and pay no attention to.

People who didn't like Ubisoft's turn towards RPG/open-world elements seem to have a more negative opinion of the game, I think.

It's alright. It's the only one of the newer AC games I've played so I don't know how it compares, but exploring ancient egypt was neat and the combat was fun enough.

As with most Ubisoft games, I never finished it. The open world is very copy pasted and it gets repetitive ~15 hours in.