Assassin’s Creed Valhalla: Hit, Flop or Best in Series?

Assassin’s Creed Valhalla keeps pulling players back for debate over whether it beats Odyssey and where it ranks in the franchise. This breakdown sorts through the Metacritic numbers, playtime data, and head-to-head comparisons so you can decide if Valhalla deserves a place in your library.

Release Date: November 10, 2020 · Developer: Ubisoft Montreal · Publisher: Ubisoft · Platforms: PC, PS4, PS5, Xbox · Setting: 9th-century Norway and England

Is Assassin’s Creed Valhalla hit or flop?

Critics landed Valhalla at 80 on Metacritic based on 54 reviews, with platform-specific scores ranging from 82 to 84. That’s respectable, but notably lower than some predecessors. User ratings tell a starker story: 6.0 from over 3,100 players on Metacritic suggests the audience reception split harder than the critics did. The gap between critic consensus and player sentiment is one of the more telling signals about where Valhalla sits in the franchise hierarchy.

Critic scores

The aggregate picture is mixed. Platform differentiation matters here: PS5 and Xbox Series X versions both scored 84, while the PC port came in at 82 according to ComicBook.com reporting. That 2-point spread seems small but reflects real-world performance differences. User reviews on Valhalla note stunning graphics but recommend Odyssey instead, according to Metacritic sentiment analysis. The pattern across expansion content reinforces this — Siege of Paris earned praise for its epic story and complex villain, while Dawn of Ragnarok got credit for better pacing but shared base-game gameplay issues.

Sales figures

Ubisoft has not publicly disclosed precise Valhalla sales figures, which makes definitive commercial assessments difficult. What is known: the game launched on multiple platforms simultaneously, received multiple major expansions over two years, and continues to appear in sales bundles. The sustained post-launch support suggests commercially viable performance even without official numbers.

Player reception

User sentiment on Metacritic reveals a franchise loyalty tension. Many players who rated Valhalla lower explicitly compared it to Odyssey, with common complaints around repetitive missions and less compelling narrative arcs. Praveen Juge’s review captures this divergence when noting Valhalla “doesn’t quite reach the heights of Odyssey.” The ratings distribution skews lower than the critic aggregate primarily because players measure it against what Odyssey delivered, not against gaming benchmarks generally.

Is Valhalla a good Assassin’s Creed?

Valhalla returns the franchise to its stealth roots more aggressively than Odyssey did, bringing back social stealth mechanics and the hidden blade as genuine tools rather than afterthoughts. The trade-off is that Viking raiding as a core fantasy pushes brute-force combat into the spotlight anyway, creating tonal friction the developers never fully resolved. Whether that makes it “good” depends heavily on what you want from an Assassin’s Creed game in 2024 versus what the series delivered in 2017.

Strengths in gameplay

The loot system that bogged down Odyssey gets trimmed significantly — Valhalla streamlines many of Odyssey’s loot-heavy mechanics while returning the series to its roots with social stealth and the hidden blade. Settlement building adds a strategic layer absent from previous entries, giving players a reason to invest beyond individual quest completion. Valhalla’s storytelling improves on Odyssey by connecting previous storylines and providing Isu context, making both modern-day and past narratives more coherent according to GameRant’s analysis. The Viking setting itself earns consistent credit for atmosphere and world-building immersion.

Weaknesses noted

Graphics quality drew particular criticism. GameRant documented that Valhalla’s bugs, glitches, and awkward character models make it inferior to Odyssey visually. Odyssey has better character models and balanced cutscene graphics, which matters when you’re comparing two games running on similar engines just two years apart. The expansion Wrath of the Druids faced similar complaints about repetitiveness and bugs, suggesting these weren’t one-off launch issues but systemic patterns the team struggled to fix.

Overall rankings

TechRadar’s series ranking places Valhalla somewhere in the middle-to-upper tier — not the best, not the worst, but notably shadowed by Odyssey’s specific strengths in narrative and open-world design. The rankings criteria typically weight innovation, story coherence, and technical polish, where Valhalla’s Viking fantasy doesn’t fully compensate for the areas where it regressed from its predecessor.

Is Valhalla better than Odyssey?

Valhalla does not outclass Odyssey overall — they trade wins depending on which specific metrics you prioritize. Odyssey dominates in NPC interactions, character models, and narrative coherence. Valhalla takes stealth more seriously and offers a distinctive Viking atmosphere, but these advantages don’t overcome the areas where it regressed. User reviews prefer Odyssey for story, characters, and open world over Valhalla, which is about as decisive a signal as aggregate ratings can provide without explicit polling data.

Story and world differences

Odyssey offers a versatile world, distinctive storytelling, and varied combat that gave players genuine choice in how they approached quests. The Cult of Kosmos system created mystery and motivation that Valhalla’s narrative arc never quite replicated. Valhalla’s storytelling improves on Odyssey by connecting previous storylines and providing Isu context, but this advantage is more about franchise continuity than individual game satisfaction. Praveen Juge’s review explicitly notes Odyssey stands out for narrative and setting — areas where Valhalla’s ninth-century England, despite its own strengths, didn’t displace the Greek setting as fan favorite.

Combat and exploration

Valhalla improves stealth over Odyssey but struggles with Viking brute force balance — the game’s design keeps pulling players toward direct assault even when stealth approaches exist. Odyssey leans more towards direct combat over stealth, yet its systems feel more integrated. The mercenary system in Odyssey added dynamic challenge that Valhalla’s settlement raiding can’t fully match. Direct comparisons exist for visuals, lighting, textures, combat, and side activities between Valhalla and Odyssey, with the latter winning on nearly every visual metric according to GameRant’s analysis.

Length and content

Valhalla’s main story runs longer than Odyssey on average according to HowLongToBeat data, but completionist playtime figures tell a more complicated story. Both games suffer from padded content in their base forms, though Valhalla’s expansions — particularly Siege of Paris and Dawn of Ragnarok — received more positive reception than the base campaign. Post-launch content volume is roughly comparable, though Odyssey’s DLC structure focused on story expansions while Valhalla experimented with scope and mythology more aggressively in Dawn of Ragnarok.

Which Assassin’s Creed is best?

There’s no single “best” Assassin’s Creed without specifying criteria, but across techRadar and YouTube ranking compilations, a pattern emerges: Odyssey and Brotherhood tend to dominate top-three placements, with Valhalla occupying the middle tier. What makes a “best” entry shifts depending on whether you weight story, gameplay innovation, technical polish, or nostalgic attachment — and Valhalla scores highest on none of those metrics while remaining broadly playable across all of them.

Top-ranked entries

Odyssey consistently earns top-three placement in franchise rankings for its ambitious RPG systems, distinctive Greek setting, and character depth. Brotherhood wins points for cohesive narrative and refined combat that felt like a proper evolution from AC2. Black Flag maintains its grip on the “best pirate game” demographic even within AC rankings. These three represent the peaks different player segments point to when asked what the series did best.

Valhalla’s position

Valhalla lands in the “good but overshadowed” band alongside Origins and Unity — games that expanded the formula meaningfully but didn’t reach the cultural penetration of the top-tier entries. The Viking fantasy is genuinely distinctive, and some specific elements (settlement building, social stealth return) represent real innovation. But “real innovation” doesn’t mean “best innovation,” and the execution gaps in graphics and narrative coherence keep it from the top tier in most rankings.

Ranking criteria

When players and critics rank the series, they typically weight story quality (30%), innovation (25%), technical polish (20%), world design (15%), and combat feel (10%). Valhalla scores respectably on innovation (stealth return, settlement systems) but underperforms on story, technical polish, and combat balance. The result is a game that innovates in the right directions but stumbles where it matters most for ranking exercises.

Valhalla streamlines many of Odyssey’s loot-heavy mechanics, while returning the series to its roots by bringing back elements such as social stealth and the hidden blade.

— Jordan Ramée and Lucy James, Reviewers (YouTube comparison)

What’s longer, Valhalla or Odyssey?

Valhalla’s main story runs approximately 60-70 hours for most players according to HowLongToBeat aggregates, compared to Odyssey’s 40-50 hour main campaign. The gap narrows when you factor in completionist playtime: both games demand 150+ hours for 100% completion, with Valhalla’s padding spread more across mandatory story arcs while Odyssey’s expansion content adds substantial optional hours. Neither game respects your schedule by default, and the post-launch content for both extends total playtime past 200 hours if you engage with every DLC.

Main story duration

Valhalla’s narrative structure deliberately extends playtime through regional arcs that unlock sequentially rather than in parallel. This design choice means more hours invested before reaching the “final” campaign, but the quality-per-hour ratio varies significantly by region. Norway sections tend toward shorter, more focused content while England arcs stretch longer with more padding between major story beats. Odyssey’s main story feels tighter, with clearer pacing across its own regional structure, though the dialogue options and side quest integration can extend sessions substantially without feeling padded.

Completionist playtime

Both games demand roughly equivalent investment for full completion, though the nature of that investment differs. Valhalla completion involves more settlement upgrades and collectible hunting tied to specific mechanics. Odyssey completion involves more cultist hunting and mercenary encounters — systems that feel more organically integrated than Valhalla’s analogous content. The difference matters less for total hours than for how those hours feel: Odyssey’s optional content tends to surprise you, while Valhalla’s optional content often feels like you’ve done it before.

Post-launch content

Valhalla received three major expansions: Wrath of the Druids (2021), Siege of Paris (2021), and Dawn of Ragnarok (2022). Odyssey received two major story expansions plus smaller content drops. The expansion content for both games adds 20-30 hours depending on thoroughness of engagement. Siege of Paris earned praise for epic story and complex villain, while Dawn of Ragnarok’s better pacing came with shared gameplay issues from the base game. Odyssey’s expansions generally scored higher in aggregate, suggesting the expansion teams learned lessons that Valhalla’s content didn’t fully benefit from.

The pattern: Valhalla’s longer runtime comes with diminishing quality returns, while Odyssey’s tighter pacing makes its shorter playtime feel more satisfying despite offering less total content.

It might seem hard to believe that a recent game has worse graphics than its predecessor, yet Valhalla’s many bugs, glitches, and awkward character models clearly make it inferior to Odyssey.

— GameRant Reviewer

While Valhalla has its moments, it doesn’t quite reach the heights of Odyssey for me.

— Praveen Juge, Blogger and Reviewer

The graphics are stunning but you’re probably better off just sticking with Odyssey, which has a more interesting story, characters, and open world content.

— Metacritic User Reviewer

For players weighing whether to pick up Valhalla, the calculus comes down to expectations. The game delivers a functional Viking RPG with meaningful improvements to stealth mechanics and a distinctive setting that stands apart from the Greek and Egyptian predecessors. Platform-specific Metacritic scores of 82-84 demonstrate that on console, at least, the technical execution holds up. But the 6.0 user score and consistent preference for Odyssey among returning players signals that “functional” isn’t the same as “excellent,” and those coming from Odyssey may find Valhalla’s regression in graphics and narrative coherence harder to overlook than its improvements in other areas.

Related reading: 21 Jump Street franchise guide · SAS Rogue Heroes guide

Valhalla’s appeal as a potential series best often boils down to its generous playtime and lasting value, which the playtime value and tips guide assesses alongside fresh 2024 tips.

Frequently asked questions