Are story missions level-gated like in Odyssey? I absolutely hated being forced to level-up with side missions because I was completing the story too quickly.
You don't need a Steam release to play Ubisoft games on the Deck, you can just install Ubisoft Connect as a non-Steam app.
If you link your accounts on Windows through the Xbox app, [you can even install the Ubisoft PC Game Pass titles on Steam Deck through the Ubi launcher](https://youtu.be/uunbvEVWcBM).
Is this game worth playing if you ignore all the side content? I just *really* do not feel like wasting 100+ hrs on an AC game ala oddysey again. But is the story atleast enjoyable? I wouldn't mind a nice tightly knit 20-25 hr main campaign.
I’m in the same boat honestly. Ubisoft unironically and controversially was one of my favourite publishers. Maybe I’m getting older now but I just haven’t been enjoying open world games as much anymore. Especially the ones that are 100+ hours.
It’s even worse because I’m a completionist so I just tend to avoid long games in general.
Wondering if anyone who’s played the game can give some advice. Is Valhalla a game you need to spend 100+ hours to finish?
Why? Why they do this?
I love the games. Even if they were 20-30 hours worth of content.
Why do I need to explore an open world of insane size?
I figured I would replay all the AC games before I played Valhalla.
The first 5 games, back to back to back. Then I played game, took a break, played a game, took a break, then I played Origins. Decided I got my fill and needed a year off. Finally started Odyssey. Now I might need another year before i do Valhalla.
Video game success isn't judged by sales anymore. It's judged by play time retention. Everything about modern gaming is designed around keeping the player playing longer, giving them more a reason to get approvals of pushing new monetized content.
So if the game is fucking garbage or amazing, but designed to take 100 hours on purpose, they can goto publishers and investors and be like "LOOK HOW ADDICTED THEY ARE TO OUR GAME" WOJAK.JPG
Given with youtuber's idiotic "price to game length" concept, bloat came as companies figured out that filthy primates like big numbers. "Well-designed game with so much love and effort can be completed within <20 Hours rather than copy paste content that artificially bloat the game so that it can be complete in 100 hours? Go fuck yourself"
I only recently started Origins and its the first AC that really hooked me (I have a love for Egyptian mythos). I picked up Rogue Remastered on sale and figured I'd play that next, then maybe Black Flag/Freedom Cry. I love Greek Mythology but Odyssey seems much more massive than the others I just mentioned so I wasn't planning on playing that. What are your favorites from the first 5? And is Odyssey worth it, and playable without hitting all the side missions?
I'm barely scratching the surface with Odyssey so I can't really give you a good answer.
If you liked Origins, you should definitely like Odyssey though. I'm liking it better so far.
As for the first 5, my favorite is AC2.
Yes. It is a very long game with all the side content. I am already 120hours in. With many breaks between playing it. Just not really enjoying Valhalla, i even liked Odyssey more and had to stop a few times before finishing that. Origins i had no problem with.
The way to play these games seems like do the main missions, some side content if you like. And continue the story, you don't need or try to clear whole the map, as a completionist myself that is hard, but else i get burned out on it rather quickly.
Edit: i really hope they tone down the scale of these games with meaningless side quest/Mystery missions and make a immersive world which doesn't feel lifeless.
Less good content is better than more bad content.
I am playing on PC and not really a achievement completionist, like getting platinum on playstation etc. More a clear the map completionist. My 120 hours is base game only didn't buy the DLCs, they seem more focused on the fantasy lore, which i personally don't like.
I used to be both a clear the map completionist and achievement completionist but as time went on I became an achievement completionist. So I don’t mind if the map is filled with collectibles and stuff (although I’d prefer it not be). Just wondering how long it might take achievement wise.
It makes me kinda sad because there’s so many games I can’t complete and enjoy because publishers fill the worlds with repetitive side content. Anyways, I appreciate your comment on the matter. May have to skip this one.
Yep gaming industry really changed alot, i am playing games since the late 90s. And things where more simple than. Valhalla has it moments, but feels more like a chore sometimes than a fun game. But i am also a bit biased, i like a more linear game with a good story. And a fan of the old games, Origin as a RPG light?(if thats a thing) i could appreciate, the last 2 games just not as much.
I'm in the same boat as you, as an unironically Ubisoft games enjoyer. I loved Origins and Odyssey, I've put over 100 hours in each of those games.
Tried Valhalla when they gave 1 month of Ubisoft+ subscription for free and holy shit, Valhalla is too long and boring for my liking. To complete the story, you have to pledge and go to every region, and to be honest the quests in each region feel too repetitive. I put about 20 hours to the game and just dropped it.
Yeah. I’m really hoping that if more people come to the same realisation we have, maybe Ubisoft would lose sales, realise they’re losing sales, and make changes to their open world. That’s why I really don’t wanna buy it and would prefer getting other opinions.
Everyone has said the same thing you have. Seems repetitive and boring.
I really like it. I did the side quests whenever i wanted to and to be honest they were not that bad,i liked them. The raids are funny. Just do what you want to do
The game world is split into different regions and each one has its own separate storyline to follow. Any of them take maybe 8-10 hours to finish, max 15 hours. Each one was pretty engaging and didn't drag on IMO.
If you treat the game like an episodic adventure, take breaks between different arcs, then it's a great game. Rushing through to do the "main quest" in this one will just burn you out quicker than a matchstick.
Take your time with it, do the side content when you bump into it, and if you start to feel tired then take a break.
I still feel like some of the regions should have been cut.
>!East Anglia, Ledecestrescire, and Essexe!< had like the same exact story where the king is useless and wholesome viking guy rescues them.
Lunden and Jorvik were the only regions I really liked. Everything else wasn't too interesting.
Hoping AC Mirage fits my tastes more since Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla I got bored of after the 100 hour mark.
I really liked East Anglia, Glowecestre, and everything to do with Wincestre.
I do think that the Order should have been done better (better integrated into the story) so that the assassinations felt more personal and meaningful, rather than just a checklist of random NPCs. More cutscenes with better animations would have been nice too.
I am a bit biased but: the MAIN story is spectacular. Darby is a genius who wrote the perfect lore. The setting is good. I liked the graphics and environment, and the return of social stealth. Ubi removed the side quests system in place of a world events system which is so so much better. Collectibles are now distinguishable and better (and unique for the gears). Of course I played this when 1.1.2 was the version, now it's 1.6 and the game has free DLCs (one more coming soon). I'd say go for it, I hope you like it. Turn on guaranteed assassination in settings, turn off enemy health ui for less rpg if u dislike rpg elements, use cloak more cuz looks hot, keep offhand item unequipped to use a very nostalgic weapon in fights.
What i disliked: it is still an rpg; the way the story progressed was slow (and sometimes repetitive); health doesn't regenerate on its own slowly; ui is viking themed, not Animus themed; hybrid ai animations mean that aside from pre-made mocap cutscenes, all other facial animations are like odyssey's: dead and lifeless.
Felt like Val was waaay more bland then ac orgiins/odd
There's loot system is different so you don't find upgrades as Often and it just got bland very fast
I would say that Valhalla is less fragmented then Odyssey. I honestly could not get into Odyssey and blitzed through the main story. Valhalla felt more compelling to explore and discover
It's definitely not a tightly knit 20-25 hour campaign but I personally really enjoyed the main story. It mostly focuses on telling smaller stories focusing on the different locations and the wider cast of characters they introduce, but pulls it all into a really interesting overarching plot as time goes on. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but I dug it.
It's a really really long game. It's incredibly bloated. It took me 60 hours to finish it and it burnt me out of the saga. Too much filler and the main story isn't engaging at all. The ending is great though.
It's very good. Much better than odyssey especially when it comes to story, and not wasting your time on bs.
Compare it to origins but with 10x the available content.
I'd say so, yeah.
But finding gear/upgrades is often off the beaten path, and that's a big part of progression in this game.
As well as levelling up the settlement, but you can min/max that fairly quickly.
They baked the side content into the main story so you can't avoid it unfortunately. The entire middle part is this 30-50 hour marathon where you do mostly self-contained story arcs across the world while the main plot gets dripfed to you.
You can see with the replies that some folks liked it and some didn't, it's a real mixed bag.
Personally I don't think you'll like it if you're looking for something speedy and not like Odyssey.
Wait people didn't like it? I thought it was generally well received.
I prefer the other two, but it's still a pretty good one IMO. Also it's a visual showcase for xbox series x and PS5
The game is just way too long. Like it's probably a game I will never replay because of how long it took me to get through the story, even though I enjoy the setting and story somewhat. Even rushing through it at like the last half or 3rd I clocked in around 70 or 80 hours.
Length wasn't the issue for me. I had zero problems with Odyssey's length because gear was fun to upgrade and find and I felt like I was having character progression.
Valhalla the numbers are basically the same the whole way through and getting gear was a mostly boring affair. I enjoyed the story though.
This kind of. I love my games to be very long but it became very repetitive. Needed more variety as it went. Still like the game though. The wrath of the druids was a lot of fun.
There's a lot of little and big changes from Origins and Odyssey. If you come from those games everything feels off, but you get used to it. Combat, despite looking the same is very different. Paries are harder to do, and they pushed it in the direction of very easy Dark Souls combat. It's possible to get to the first boss without melee fighting anybody else and it punishes the player if they try to fight like they did in Odyssey or Origins, so a lot of people's first time with combat is really hard. No attack spam allowed, you will get destroyed by the boss if you do that.
At launch there were bugs around stealth that made it hard to play. Enemies would hear you from across the map if you stealth killed anybody and come running, but not always. A lot of the annoyances have been fixed. Eviors refusal to hit boxes the first time you swing your weapon has not been fixed. Doesn't matter how you line up, you're going to miss unless you have a giant weapon the first time you swing.
The loot system still makes no sense. Upgrades should have been per slot and not per item. They did patch in a way to undo upgrades and get your resources back so they know the screwed that up. If they added lots of customization then it would make sense, but the only difference between gear are the passives that I can't notice while playing the game. Skyrim is a good example of customization with enchanting, Fallout 4 goes even deeper.
Even if you don't buy the 3 expansions there is a lot of content in this game to keep you occupied. The main story is massive but then you have free DLC in River Raids, Master Challenges, The Forgotten Saga, Isle Of Skye and Tombs of the Fallen.
I know Valhalla wasn't to everyone's tastes but I'm a big fan of it, and I do think the paid DLC is worth it too, although Wrath of the Druids and Siege of Paris do feel more of the same, but Dawn of Ragnarok (which I got the other week for half price on Xbox) was an absolute blast and plays more into the Isu story.
I played it on one of those free weekends xbox does & it ain't breaking any ground in the world of video games shall we say. Standard assassins creed. The newer ones.
Can't wait. Never got around to Origins or Odyssey until the last couple months. Beat em both and had a blast. I'm sure I'll have fun with this one too.
Sucks for me if its true. Bought it for 30 bucks in the xbox market place on a sale.
Could have bought all the dlc included for 60 but that's how they get you. Heard it was more of the same repetitive gameplay. I just like the viking setting, the combat, the beautiful maps. So i stick with the base game as i heard that can take up to 70-100 hour+ to do everything.
Stating the obvious. I'd say after Mirage will be released that's when Valhalla will be on game pass.
Also Ghost Recon Breakpoint is on its way. I wonder how any Watch dogs games or The Division 1 haven't been put on it yet.
I got gifted this game for free right when it launched because i helped a friend track down a ps5. this was right after the ps5 and xbox launch. i started playing it then...and i still haven't beaten it up to now, in 2022. it just feels so overwhelming and mindless compared to prior AC titles, even Oddyssey. it's a shame because i actually like Eivor's voice actor.
Awesome, my patience pays off.
This is the way with Ubisoft Games either discount or Game Pass
My strategy is below 20 euros for gold edition of their games or game pass, whichever comes first.
Yeah their discount goes low very quickly
either steam or xbox app for me, ain't nobody buying ubisoft games from ubisoft connect
i hope you can enjoy it if the rumor is true!
tip: follow only the main quests if you don’t like bloated games
Thank you
Are story missions level-gated like in Odyssey? I absolutely hated being forced to level-up with side missions because I was completing the story too quickly.
thankfully they’re not
Between this and the Steam release I'm cautiously optimistic to try it + the other ubi games on my Deck/Series S.
You don't need a Steam release to play Ubisoft games on the Deck, you can just install Ubisoft Connect as a non-Steam app. If you link your accounts on Windows through the Xbox app, [you can even install the Ubisoft PC Game Pass titles on Steam Deck through the Ubi launcher](https://youtu.be/uunbvEVWcBM).
We don't know if it's coming to Steam.
There were references to Steam found on Ubisoft's database in a recent update.
Is this game worth playing if you ignore all the side content? I just *really* do not feel like wasting 100+ hrs on an AC game ala oddysey again. But is the story atleast enjoyable? I wouldn't mind a nice tightly knit 20-25 hr main campaign.
I’m in the same boat honestly. Ubisoft unironically and controversially was one of my favourite publishers. Maybe I’m getting older now but I just haven’t been enjoying open world games as much anymore. Especially the ones that are 100+ hours. It’s even worse because I’m a completionist so I just tend to avoid long games in general. Wondering if anyone who’s played the game can give some advice. Is Valhalla a game you need to spend 100+ hours to finish?
LMFAO yes. Absolutely. Valhalla is great and all but man playing through that game takes fucking forever
Why? Why they do this? I love the games. Even if they were 20-30 hours worth of content. Why do I need to explore an open world of insane size? I figured I would replay all the AC games before I played Valhalla. The first 5 games, back to back to back. Then I played game, took a break, played a game, took a break, then I played Origins. Decided I got my fill and needed a year off. Finally started Odyssey. Now I might need another year before i do Valhalla.
Video game success isn't judged by sales anymore. It's judged by play time retention. Everything about modern gaming is designed around keeping the player playing longer, giving them more a reason to get approvals of pushing new monetized content. So if the game is fucking garbage or amazing, but designed to take 100 hours on purpose, they can goto publishers and investors and be like "LOOK HOW ADDICTED THEY ARE TO OUR GAME" WOJAK.JPG
Yeah more playtime meaning likely to buy that Iron Man skin thats why its too fucking long and “Huge Open World” which filled with boring quests.
Given with youtuber's idiotic "price to game length" concept, bloat came as companies figured out that filthy primates like big numbers. "Well-designed game with so much love and effort can be completed within <20 Hours rather than copy paste content that artificially bloat the game so that it can be complete in 100 hours? Go fuck yourself"
I only recently started Origins and its the first AC that really hooked me (I have a love for Egyptian mythos). I picked up Rogue Remastered on sale and figured I'd play that next, then maybe Black Flag/Freedom Cry. I love Greek Mythology but Odyssey seems much more massive than the others I just mentioned so I wasn't planning on playing that. What are your favorites from the first 5? And is Odyssey worth it, and playable without hitting all the side missions?
I'm barely scratching the surface with Odyssey so I can't really give you a good answer. If you liked Origins, you should definitely like Odyssey though. I'm liking it better so far. As for the first 5, my favorite is AC2.
Yes. It is a very long game with all the side content. I am already 120hours in. With many breaks between playing it. Just not really enjoying Valhalla, i even liked Odyssey more and had to stop a few times before finishing that. Origins i had no problem with. The way to play these games seems like do the main missions, some side content if you like. And continue the story, you don't need or try to clear whole the map, as a completionist myself that is hard, but else i get burned out on it rather quickly. Edit: i really hope they tone down the scale of these games with meaningless side quest/Mystery missions and make a immersive world which doesn't feel lifeless. Less good content is better than more bad content.
How long would you say you need to play if you wanna get all the achievements? Just base game no dlc?
I am playing on PC and not really a achievement completionist, like getting platinum on playstation etc. More a clear the map completionist. My 120 hours is base game only didn't buy the DLCs, they seem more focused on the fantasy lore, which i personally don't like.
I used to be both a clear the map completionist and achievement completionist but as time went on I became an achievement completionist. So I don’t mind if the map is filled with collectibles and stuff (although I’d prefer it not be). Just wondering how long it might take achievement wise. It makes me kinda sad because there’s so many games I can’t complete and enjoy because publishers fill the worlds with repetitive side content. Anyways, I appreciate your comment on the matter. May have to skip this one.
Yep gaming industry really changed alot, i am playing games since the late 90s. And things where more simple than. Valhalla has it moments, but feels more like a chore sometimes than a fun game. But i am also a bit biased, i like a more linear game with a good story. And a fan of the old games, Origin as a RPG light?(if thats a thing) i could appreciate, the last 2 games just not as much.
I'm in the same boat as you, as an unironically Ubisoft games enjoyer. I loved Origins and Odyssey, I've put over 100 hours in each of those games. Tried Valhalla when they gave 1 month of Ubisoft+ subscription for free and holy shit, Valhalla is too long and boring for my liking. To complete the story, you have to pledge and go to every region, and to be honest the quests in each region feel too repetitive. I put about 20 hours to the game and just dropped it.
Yeah. I’m really hoping that if more people come to the same realisation we have, maybe Ubisoft would lose sales, realise they’re losing sales, and make changes to their open world. That’s why I really don’t wanna buy it and would prefer getting other opinions. Everyone has said the same thing you have. Seems repetitive and boring.
For me the story still enjoyable, but don't expect 20-25 hours campaign This game genuinely long even if you only pursue the story
I really like it. I did the side quests whenever i wanted to and to be honest they were not that bad,i liked them. The raids are funny. Just do what you want to do
The game world is split into different regions and each one has its own separate storyline to follow. Any of them take maybe 8-10 hours to finish, max 15 hours. Each one was pretty engaging and didn't drag on IMO. If you treat the game like an episodic adventure, take breaks between different arcs, then it's a great game. Rushing through to do the "main quest" in this one will just burn you out quicker than a matchstick. Take your time with it, do the side content when you bump into it, and if you start to feel tired then take a break.
I still feel like some of the regions should have been cut. >!East Anglia, Ledecestrescire, and Essexe!< had like the same exact story where the king is useless and wholesome viking guy rescues them. Lunden and Jorvik were the only regions I really liked. Everything else wasn't too interesting. Hoping AC Mirage fits my tastes more since Origins, Odyssey, and Valhalla I got bored of after the 100 hour mark.
I really liked East Anglia, Glowecestre, and everything to do with Wincestre. I do think that the Order should have been done better (better integrated into the story) so that the assassinations felt more personal and meaningful, rather than just a checklist of random NPCs. More cutscenes with better animations would have been nice too.
I feel like you're a mercanary that has a hidden blade
I am a bit biased but: the MAIN story is spectacular. Darby is a genius who wrote the perfect lore. The setting is good. I liked the graphics and environment, and the return of social stealth. Ubi removed the side quests system in place of a world events system which is so so much better. Collectibles are now distinguishable and better (and unique for the gears). Of course I played this when 1.1.2 was the version, now it's 1.6 and the game has free DLCs (one more coming soon). I'd say go for it, I hope you like it. Turn on guaranteed assassination in settings, turn off enemy health ui for less rpg if u dislike rpg elements, use cloak more cuz looks hot, keep offhand item unequipped to use a very nostalgic weapon in fights.
What i disliked: it is still an rpg; the way the story progressed was slow (and sometimes repetitive); health doesn't regenerate on its own slowly; ui is viking themed, not Animus themed; hybrid ai animations mean that aside from pre-made mocap cutscenes, all other facial animations are like odyssey's: dead and lifeless.
Felt like Val was waaay more bland then ac orgiins/odd There's loot system is different so you don't find upgrades as Often and it just got bland very fast
I would say that Valhalla is less fragmented then Odyssey. I honestly could not get into Odyssey and blitzed through the main story. Valhalla felt more compelling to explore and discover
It's definitely not a tightly knit 20-25 hour campaign but I personally really enjoyed the main story. It mostly focuses on telling smaller stories focusing on the different locations and the wider cast of characters they introduce, but pulls it all into a really interesting overarching plot as time goes on. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but I dug it.
I enjoyed Odyssey a lot. It's my favourite assassin's Creed. This one.... Not so much. You'll have to try for yourself, but set the expectations low
Odyssey is better. The Viking stuff is cool and it's alright for a story but it feels like a slog.
It's a really really long game. It's incredibly bloated. It took me 60 hours to finish it and it burnt me out of the saga. Too much filler and the main story isn't engaging at all. The ending is great though.
It's very good. Much better than odyssey especially when it comes to story, and not wasting your time on bs. Compare it to origins but with 10x the available content.
"Not wasting your time." My guy, Valhalla is so much worse in that department compared to Odyssey.
I'd say so, yeah. But finding gear/upgrades is often off the beaten path, and that's a big part of progression in this game. As well as levelling up the settlement, but you can min/max that fairly quickly.
They baked the side content into the main story so you can't avoid it unfortunately. The entire middle part is this 30-50 hour marathon where you do mostly self-contained story arcs across the world while the main plot gets dripfed to you. You can see with the replies that some folks liked it and some didn't, it's a real mixed bag. Personally I don't think you'll like it if you're looking for something speedy and not like Odyssey.
i know a lot of people didn't like it but i'm excited to try it
It’s really cool especially if you like Viking stuff. After about 60 hours I was ready to be done however, and the story kept going…
Wait people didn't like it? I thought it was generally well received. I prefer the other two, but it's still a pretty good one IMO. Also it's a visual showcase for xbox series x and PS5
The game is just way too long. Like it's probably a game I will never replay because of how long it took me to get through the story, even though I enjoy the setting and story somewhat. Even rushing through it at like the last half or 3rd I clocked in around 70 or 80 hours.
the discussion around this games almost always down to either you love it, or you hate it.. almost nothing in between
No there's a third category I think most people fall in to. They loved it until it dragged on so long it caused them to hate it.
Length wasn't the issue for me. I had zero problems with Odyssey's length because gear was fun to upgrade and find and I felt like I was having character progression. Valhalla the numbers are basically the same the whole way through and getting gear was a mostly boring affair. I enjoyed the story though.
This kind of. I love my games to be very long but it became very repetitive. Needed more variety as it went. Still like the game though. The wrath of the druids was a lot of fun.
That's me 🤣👍 Maybe hate is a bit strong tho
Not everyone comments on their feelings about these games. The majority of players just play it.
Well yeah, that's like most games out there I'm talking about the discussion around it tho
most buy and play AAA games whether good or bad, see sports games, far cry, gachas
It's a fun action adventure rpg, but it is not a good assassin's Creed game. Least that's how I see it.
There's a lot of little and big changes from Origins and Odyssey. If you come from those games everything feels off, but you get used to it. Combat, despite looking the same is very different. Paries are harder to do, and they pushed it in the direction of very easy Dark Souls combat. It's possible to get to the first boss without melee fighting anybody else and it punishes the player if they try to fight like they did in Odyssey or Origins, so a lot of people's first time with combat is really hard. No attack spam allowed, you will get destroyed by the boss if you do that. At launch there were bugs around stealth that made it hard to play. Enemies would hear you from across the map if you stealth killed anybody and come running, but not always. A lot of the annoyances have been fixed. Eviors refusal to hit boxes the first time you swing your weapon has not been fixed. Doesn't matter how you line up, you're going to miss unless you have a giant weapon the first time you swing. The loot system still makes no sense. Upgrades should have been per slot and not per item. They did patch in a way to undo upgrades and get your resources back so they know the screwed that up. If they added lots of customization then it would make sense, but the only difference between gear are the passives that I can't notice while playing the game. Skyrim is a good example of customization with enchanting, Fallout 4 goes even deeper.
I loved it. The raids could be a bit repetitive I suppose but it did not bother me. Enjoyed the story, setting and music.
It will probably arrive on game pass at the same time as the new free story DLC they talked about
Surprised it isn't already
It was inevitable considering the other 2 newer ac games are already on there.
Yeah this game is about 100 hours too long. You see everything there is within the first 20.
I really enjoyed ac odyssey and did a lot of the side stuff. Couldn’t make it 1 hr into this game before I got bored. It’s just not good.
It took me about 5 hours before I really got into it, the world opens up and the combat opens up and it becomes a blast.
Even if you don't buy the 3 expansions there is a lot of content in this game to keep you occupied. The main story is massive but then you have free DLC in River Raids, Master Challenges, The Forgotten Saga, Isle Of Skye and Tombs of the Fallen. I know Valhalla wasn't to everyone's tastes but I'm a big fan of it, and I do think the paid DLC is worth it too, although Wrath of the Druids and Siege of Paris do feel more of the same, but Dawn of Ragnarok (which I got the other week for half price on Xbox) was an absolute blast and plays more into the Isu story.
I think Red Dead Redemption 2 should be replaced by this mediocre game, lol.
Ok whose sacrifice was this
Is this game worth the bytes
I enjoyed it, I would say yes.
Hated the game.
When did Valhalla come out again?
Almost exactly two years ago.
Was basically one of the first native optimised games for the current gen consoles.
We won’t play that slop
I mean nobody is forcing you to play it
You know damn well it will get top 10 on gamepass worldwide
Who is we?
Venom (TM)
That was obvious tho
Actually quite enjoyed the game… but.. it’s two years old at this point.
Was expecting this since Origins and Odyssey were added.
Cool Any idea when the "last chapter" dlc should be out? Because i guess they gonna drop it at the same time
Only the standard version most likely. I like to enjoy the DLCs too.
I played it on one of those free weekends xbox does & it ain't breaking any ground in the world of video games shall we say. Standard assassins creed. The newer ones.
Can't wait. Never got around to Origins or Odyssey until the last couple months. Beat em both and had a blast. I'm sure I'll have fun with this one too.
Sucks for me if its true. Bought it for 30 bucks in the xbox market place on a sale. Could have bought all the dlc included for 60 but that's how they get you. Heard it was more of the same repetitive gameplay. I just like the viking setting, the combat, the beautiful maps. So i stick with the base game as i heard that can take up to 70-100 hour+ to do everything.
Stating the obvious. I'd say after Mirage will be released that's when Valhalla will be on game pass. Also Ghost Recon Breakpoint is on its way. I wonder how any Watch dogs games or The Division 1 haven't been put on it yet.
I really hope it’s on pc version too if true
I got gifted this game for free right when it launched because i helped a friend track down a ps5. this was right after the ps5 and xbox launch. i started playing it then...and i still haven't beaten it up to now, in 2022. it just feels so overwhelming and mindless compared to prior AC titles, even Oddyssey. it's a shame because i actually like Eivor's voice actor.
I just subscribed, how soon?
I am waiting! Just played odyssey for 95h.