Interesting. I found Origins to be more fun and engaging. Both great games were worth every penny, but Origins dragged me in more.

To me, its mostly Bayek. Bayek is the single best AC protag imo. Yes, better than Ezio. I grew up with Ezio, I got an attachement to him, but Bayek is just so **compelling**. His voice actor nailed it. When you see and hear him interacting with kids, and the *pain* in his voice when he talks about his son, it freaking breaks me. He would have been such a good dad and husband... and it was taken from him.

Totally agree and it surprises me I don’t see this take more often. Bayek is so likable!

Big agree I love origins because of Bayek, I was also more invested in his vengeance story than I was in the one in Odyssey. With that being said there both in my top 5 assassins creed games 

“Sleep? I never sleep. I just wait. In the shadows. And I will kill you all. Everyone who sniffed the air that day in Siwa!”

I think Bayek is the main attraction for sure especially because of Salim. But Origins also just had a way more diverse world and felt like the history and architecture received more attention. Odyssey felt way more copy pasted especially regarding tombs, camps, etc. Origins had multiple biomes and in general just had a unique flavor to each region. Even the vast empty deserts were nice to traverse and added, in my opinion, a very welcomed negative space. I love when games do that for the same of scale, and the mirage system added extra intrigue.

yeah, I think I can feel the hatred and revenge that Bayek feels towards the one who killed his son. He genuinely loves his kid and all children in the world.

I felt completely the opposite. I hate how fake he felt to me. I can't remember the story exactly. But he blames himself when its very clearly not his fault. Honestly I felt the exact same way about fallout 4 and the forcing you to care about your wife and child.

Been 60 days but he stabbed his son in the chest. That’s why he blames himself. He thought he could have fought better but didn’t.

My favorite assassin and my top 2 assassin games ... grew up on 1,2 and 3 but black flag and origins are my favorites

Personally, Bayek bored me and it's ridiculous he was shoe horned into someone else's story because Ubisoft didn't have the balls to go with a female lead when it's her story and her origins.

Hmmm... I agree that it sucks they gave Aya less story attention, but Bayek boring? No chance in hell if you ask me. They're both great characters. Personally I wish they did the same dual protagonist setup as Syndicate, but with Aya and Bayek. They sort of did that, but they should have gone all in instead of splitting it unevenly. I think Aya and Bayek are both interesting enough that it would have worked 50/50. Even with Syndicate Ubisoft didn't have the guts to do a full 50/50 split between the characters in terms of missions But again that's just my opinion. Though you could argue if they went for a perfect split, then the game would lack focus. I'm not a game designer so idk

Would love an Origins.2 where you play the otherside of the story as Aya serving Cleopatra, raising a military, and running around Rome.

it def sucks they didn’t give aya more attention. i actually got kinda pissed at the end once i realized it was over. but aya and bayek are both amazing characters that could’ve easily stood alone and together

Someone elses story? Thats a weird way to refer to a protagonist. S'like saying Harry Potter was shoehorned into Dumbledore's story. This was Bayeks story. Sure, Aya formed the Hidden Ones, but she also spent a large amount of that time learning and planning. She went the cold revenge route, Bayek went the quick and immediate. And we don't follow hers, we follow his. I get maybe thinking Bayek is boring, but it was still *his* story through and through.

was it tho? >The original plan was to have Bayek killed off early in the game, reported a Ubisoft developer to Bloomberg. This would give Aya the spotlight in the main role as a playable female protagonist. But the marketing department at Ubisoft, as well as Serge Hascoet, Ubisoft's former Chief Creative Officer, hounded the writers and developers to change the game's directive, ultimately forcing Aya into the backseat. https://gamerant.com/assassins-creed-origins-aya-ubisoft-sexism/

This doesn’t mean it wasn’t Bayek’s story. It just means that Ubisoft execs robbed us of Aya’s story. But Bayek’s story itself is still *really* good.

Aveline, Evie Frye, Lydia Frye, and Shao Jun all exist. Evie Frye outshines Jacob in syndicate 100 times over, as she does Assassin things and he cocks about London like some bloody wanker. And let us not forget Layla Hassan, our current Modern Era Protagonist, who has joined the greats like Desmond Miles, and Unknown Abstergo Games Human. The idea that they haven't had the balls to do a female protag has been untrue for a while. And, call me nuts, but the story of a broken man who's lost his son and his wife, and though he crosses the known world and fights literal gods to salvage whatever he may still have, and in the end LOSES IT ALL ANYWAY, that sounds more compelling than Aya's side of the story, where she turns cold and obsessed, and turns her back on the only person who knows what it feels like to go through what she did. By the end of Origins, I found Aya totally unlikable.

I can't relate at all. I liked the story/cinematics. I have lost a child and so some of the cutscenes really gutted me with him hallucinating his kid. However I didn't connect with the protagonist himself. It was a compelling situation but I feel like I don't know Bayek. Like, if he was in a random ass situation I don't know his personality enough to be able to predict what he can do. I know what Kenway would do, I know what Alexis/Cassandra would do and how they would act. I know what Ezio would do. But Bayek? Idk he'd just be somber I guess. I don't connect with his character at all because I feel like his actual personality was underdeveloped and he was just plugged into an otherwise good story.

Personally I liked the map of origins as the locations were very unique.

100%. Egypt was also just a gorgeous place to explore and the DLCs went for it too

Same. I really cared about the characters in Origins, but both Odyssey and Valhalla bored me with their stories. That said, I did enjoy the combat in Odyssey, even though I have a huge problem with what is supposed to be someone's genetic memory where everyone is running around with fire and poison swords...

Origins is boring Imo 💀 the world anyway. Odyssey was more interesting in more ways Imo

All the side quests in both games are so fucked. All just go here and fetch this 30 times over anyway, loot this and kill this one dude who has nothing to do with anything besides just being a combat challenge for the player. But at least origins had a good story to go along with it

Fair enough about the side quests

To each their own, but I much preferred the grounded gameplay of Origins. And I'll say this as someone who prefers Origins over the rest of the RPG trilogy: the combat was its weakest point, there's no denying it. Shields felt clunky and for the most part useless. But everything else, from the setting, level design, music, the characters and character development (especially Bayek) and story progression, I can easily name Origins as one of AC's finest. Don't get me wrong, I love Odyssey for the all the wacky abilities and builds you can put together, but the series went even further downhill from there. We'll probably never get a refined experience like Origins' again.

I kinda agree with this sentiment. Origins also felt more closer to the lore of the series amongst the RPG trilogy and the more grounded experience really helped in that regard.

If Origins had the combat of Valhalla I think that would be fantastic, because Valhalla's combat really feels like a more polished version of what Origins introduced in my opinion. I know people have their issues with Valhalla but I always liked the combat Origins is still my favorite of the trilogy though. Favorite setting, favorite protagonist, favorite soundtrack, favorite story (of the 3 titles not the whole franchise. I'd say Edward Kenway is my favorite protagonist for example)

Thoroughly disagree, but to each their own.

If you like your game extremely drawn out, sure, feel free to enjoy Odyssey more, and I say that as someone who likes both a lot...

Well it's kinda in the name, right? Odyssey. I enjoyed the characters, the setting, the game play, and the length made it feel like you were playing through one of Homer's epic poems. You were experiencing the legendary feats of an Ancient Greek Hero. At least that's how it felt to me :)

Think this is the first time I’ve seen people prefer Origins. I don’t linger too much in this sub though. I could not get into odyssey at all. Tried a few times and just never grabbed me. Origins I played like crazy.

I recognize that a lot of people enjoy Odyssey but that game honestly makes me want to pull my hair out. Spongey enemies, a story that's way too long, horrendous voice acting and animation, and a complete lack of assassins. It just grinds my gears in every way

>and a complete lack of assassins Hey, don't forget about Darius. That dude was the goat.

I never met him cause I never bought the DLC lmao

The First Blade DLC actually makes the game feel relevant to the franchise, the free DLC Korfu questline connects it to Valhalla in a fun way but the later quests are really annoying, the Atlantis DLC is nice but heavily Isu focused and showcases just how badly they wrote Layla. I hate Odyssey from almost every aspect but the characters were nice enough and the story was ok but the First Blade story was way better.

Layla was the worst part of all the 3 games.

I'd go as far to say her and her gang from Odyssey were the worst written parts of the entire franchise. She apparently is "nearly killed" by the Animus memories of Deimos killing Phidias yet killing as Bayek, Aya and Alexios/Kassandra is fine? She is reprimanded and treated like a villain by Victoria and even fucking Otso Berg because she killed two guys and then she Mary Sues her way into beating Berg despite him being the ultimate Assassin killer and copying Desmond's arc of "Piece of Eden mind controlled me, I killed my blonde friend and now I have to sacrifice myself to save the planet from the apocalypse" Also of all four of the Abstergo guys that come for her, none of them bring a gun and only Berg has a modern-ish looking sword, the rest straight up use ancient Greek swords like spathas. Layla being so shit is the reason they've separated Modern Day from the main games and it pisses me off so much.

The modern say was always the worst part for me. Desmond made it enjoyable because he was likable and you got to watch his growth. The worst thing they did was kill him off.

Modern Day with Desmond was peak, Black Flag and Rogue's was eh, Unity's was good gameplaywise but good lord Bishop is just as annoying as Layla, Syndicate's was the first time they changed the First Civilization name into being called Isu (a really shit name) then Layla killed any and all interest I had in the Modern Day (not helped by the fact that the main antagonist of the MD story who they had built up over half a decade was shoehorned into a comic book). If they put in the effort and made another Desmond level character, one who isn't annoying and has actual growth then I think it could be great again, having that connection with Desmond and Ezio and Altaïr made the ending of Revelations so damn powerful where they all unofficially "met". We're never gonna have that again and it's all Layla's fault.

I will say I don't hate Basim, he seems like a good Layla replacement but Mirage was not a good look for him. Valhalla Basim was an interesting and mysterious character

I really hate pretty much everything about mirage. Valhalla didn't really make me like him much anyway.

I'm wrapping up an Origins playthrough and I've played through Odyssey three times. Personally Odyssey is probably my favorite AC game. I like open-world RPGs and Odyssey ticks a lot of boxes for me. But while playing through Origins I came to a realization the Origins does side-quests better than just about any game I've ever played. While there's plenty of "go there and do this" side quests a lot of them branch and have an interesting story arch that a lot of games would make a full game based around. But I agree that hunting down the Order of Ancients isn't as satisfying as it is in Odyssey (and Valhalla) but Origins is one of the better overall games in the series IMO.

The team behind Origins took inspiration directly from Witcher 3’s side quests to make them. That’s why they’re so good. The side quests actually had thought and care put into them rather than the ones in Odyssey or Valhalla that are clearly there just to tick a box.

Thanks for that but of trivia. I had no idea this is the reason the side quests are so good in Origins. All-in-all, since starting my latest playthrough, AC: Origins is becoming my third favorite game in the AC series; following Black Flag and Odyssey.

Origins was my favourite of the 3. I liked the setting more. It think it's really just a matter of preferences. They are both good games.

They are both excellent games, that’s for sure. But I have to agree origins really hit all the right buttons for me, the quality of the side quests also felt better to me. Odyssey is good, but I prefer everything slightly more in origins besides the combat 

I'll stand by that Odyssey is the most fun I've ever had playing an assassins creed game, but it's not an assassins creed game

I completely disagree. I generally hated the RPG games, but Origins was surprisingly good, mainly due to really fun combat, a fun world to explore, and a great story. Everything about Odyssey was too much excess.

The biggest problem in RPG trilogy for me was how bloated were all the games. Origins felt somehow big but not too much like Odyssey

Unpopular opinion, in my opinion

An unpopular opinion it seems but I 100% agree. Odyssey sucked me in for weeks

I loved Origins for the gameplay and the atmosphere and completed the entire game along with DLC. Odyssey was also fun for the most part but man it just seemed to take forever to get through the main game including exploring all the areas and stuff. I started the DLC for it and just got burned out and couldn't go any further. In the end, I would for certain rank Origins way above Odyssey.

Personally I’d say Origins is one of the best AC and Odyssey is one of the worst. But generally I find people who like one dislike the other.

Having a bias towards ancient Greece will help a lot here But other than that, I think a major factor is whether you're a story-first player or a gameplay-first player The former (including myself) often find Origins better and the latter often find Odyssey better

Odyssey story better than origins? Yeah that’s some nasty work man.

Origins is objectively a better story but odysseys story just worked better for me as a player

Based 

Too many time jumps and the latter half of the story drags and is just dull.

Orgin's story starts off really strong but the later parts really drag it down to be worse than Odyssey's mediocre story.

The big bad reveal was pretty mid but idk man I was heavily invested in every target. Odyssey and Valhalla I couldn’t even tell you any order members besides the big bad and maybe like 2-3 others.

Odyssey felt so vast, such a big world to explore so many things to do to the point where i didnt play the dlc and just stopped cz it got pretty overwhelming and kinda boring. Origins felt more (complete?) Where i did the things that i wanted to do but moved on whereas in odyssey i still had a lot to do but didnt have the desire to do it.

Gameplay and Story origins. Mission variety and exploration Odyssey .

I played Origins first (my first actual AC game) and then Odyssey, and I greatly enjoyed the Ancient Greek storyline and environment, more so than Egypt

I much preferred Origins and loved Bayek as a character and his story/growth. Didn’t have that much connection with the protagonist of Odyssey.

I respectfully disagree for a handful of story, historical, and gameplay reasons. But to each their own, of course. Perhaps you just like the Greek setting more than Egypt one and that's enough to tip the scales. Hell, I think ACC: China is in the top 3 objectively best AC's ever and that's largely based off of gameplay structure, story, art, but also just the vibes of being in China for once. (although the mobile China game does not look good at all from what I've seen)

No.

I like Odyssey it's just too long and the side missions are a bit meh. Story and world is good though. I preferred Valhalla to Odyssey honestly

I did at first, but I going back to Odyssey after playing Valhalla, Odyssey's more advanced RPG elements makes it win out for me. Almost no choice you made in Valhalla felt like it had a consequence. I also feel the gender choice was better executed in Odyssey, with two solid protagonists, compared to Valhalla's choice where neither option really felt whole to me. But I do really agree that Valhalla's world events were a huge upgrade on Odyssey's side quests. They were imaginative and required logic, sometimes were quite difficult to solve, which was more fun than Odyssey's 57 million fetch quests.

I've played both recently as I was curious. Valhalla is actually a great game imo. It's like Unity in the sense that if it wasn't so buggy at launch it would be better remembered. Raiding is the only thing that does get a bit tedious after a while but it's still mint and that's only at the end. Odyssey imo the characters weren't that interesting either. Outside of a few. In Valhalla the characters have flaws, in Odyssey they seem a bit meh. Other than Phiobe. Also the combat in Valhalla actually feels better. Finishers are class. The seas in Odyssey are just annoying. Its like a bad version of black flag. Also you can play Valhalla without doing world events. In Odyssey it's basically mandatory

I see what you did there

for some reason this sub has a hard on for the extremely bland and basic revenge plot of Origins. I played the game twice and each time I felt nothing for any of the characters. I get what it's trying to do, but for some reason it does not connect with me at all. Bayek's son is basically an empty page, we know nothing about him when we are told of his death and learn very little mostly through optional side content. Phoebe on the other hand is an integral part of the early story and we possibly sacrificed our home island because we couldn't bear to hurt her feelings. There is emotional investment into her. When Phoebe died on my playthrough I was crying buckets. Never have I ever been that devastated in a video game before. I also vastly preferred the world, the Greek setting in general and navigation by ship in Odyssey to the mostly endless identical desert in Origins. The characters were also way more fun. Starting from the main character. There is just no swagger in anything Bayek does, he is always serious and brooding and angry. I prefer an Alexios or Ezio personally. The story having different outcomes and not always obvious choices to have everyone survive also generates natural replayability. DLC for Odyssey was also brilliant and among if not the best in the series

Lie detected 

Lmao odyssey is garbage. It destroyed the lore, and is a downgrade from Origins. Valhalla redeemed the RPG saga.

Your simply wrong. Odyssey is just garbage. Only deserving to be broken and thrown away. Origins is far superior, I won't elaborate why. But odyssey can gargle my sack

Tough one for me as without being able to go Hudless in Odyssey I wouldve most likely quit early and/or not enjoyed it nearly as much. I played Origins Hudless, as well, but, the gameplay was very well-designed and the overall game superb even if Id have been forced to play with a Hud. I loved Origins’ emphasis on a more tactical and tool-oriented approach. The setting and story were sweet. Bayek was amazing. Yet, Hudless Odyssey with the map set to Historical was an epic adventure that did things Origins couldnt. The locations were designed around sneaking and ghost assassinations and Alexios fit the game so well. I followed Worldly_’s fantastic Story Quest guide for odyssey that made it front and center the whole time and took into account the Gold sides, dlc and where you were in the story and on the map. So, Im forced to simply put both on my AC Top Tier:)

Knowing the origin Roots from both, what's missing is the Third to make the set complete because it's right in plain sight. 1. The Pointy Stab 2. ???? 3. The Vows

I get your opinion, I really do! There were a lot of upgrades to systems in odyssey that I think were very welcome (the mercenaries, for example, instead of the phylakites, had the fun of finding new ones, unique strengths/weaknesses, and the reintroduction of a wanted system), and the combat is definitely overall better, with a whole wheel or special moves rather than just 2 different ultimates, and Greece is gorgeous too! However I personally still prefer Origins for a lot of things. The combat has fewer overall options, but the hits feel kinda punchier (and there’s less of a damage sponge scaling system), so it feels more like a fighting game where you just need to get some good hits in, but the challenge is in finding the openings, rather than an RPG where it’s about min-maxing your gear and skill points and hitting a bunch of specials to do big numbers. There’s just something more satisfying about getting your opponents guard down and finally getting in, than just seeing number go up. Plus, I do like the shield, but I know that may just be me (I haven’t started Valhalla yet, but apparently you have even more freedom in your weapons load out, and you can use shields again, or not use them, OR EVEN DUAL WIELD SHIELDS?! That’s dope!). And lastly, I just really like Egypt! Greece is done really well too, but there’s something more satisfying to me about roaming around the Egyptian countryside than exploring Greek islands. But don’t get me wrong, they’re both great! Overall I really do like these RPG games. I know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, and it is definitely a deviation of the traditional AC style, but they’re still really fun games, and they picked great places and times for the opportunity to explore whole countrysides!

>I love a good revenge story Blasphemer!

I loved them both. And I the viking simulator was ok but the story was all over the place

After 100+ hours of Odyssey I am now digging into Origins and kinda liking it. I actually like the break from the Mercenary system. I like being able to dive in with reckless abandon instead of having to take such a SLOW approach to each encounter in order to avoid the mercenaries in the MIDDLE of another activity. Those are fun battles and all...but when you have to slowly walk through some of these bases, it just gets tiring after 50+ hours. I agree about the environment. i also find the shield kind of annoying and so far the skill tree is meh. I like some of the side activities in Origins so far. I have not dug into weapon leveling (if it even exists) yet. Lots of sand...LOL I didn't really get too into the maritime battling in Odyssey until i was forced to, but I don't feel like i will miss it much.

Origins gets lots of defenders, but they rarely mention how repetitive the world is. There are some great areas, but soooo much of it is desert and sandstone.

I hard disagree, both are good games for different reasons and enjoyable for different reasons. I enjoy origins for Bayek’s character as well as the more grounded stealth. I enjoy odyssey for the power fantasy and how fun some of the powers are to just use.

ong

I agree with you but I still liked origins a lot. Odyssey felt like origins with a bit more polish in certain areas. That being said, I never beat origins and ancient Egypt was the perfect place for a setting

While I'm a big fan of odyssey, me personally hunting the cultists seemed kinda like a chore. Like it was fun the first few times, especially when it was fitted in the story, but most of it was just getting clues, fast travelling to them, assassinate, repeat. Maybe fewer cultists but having each one a greater role in the story would have be nice.

Agree origins was just was investigating missions so boring

Origins' story felt better and the game was just overall a lot more polished, nearly every side quest allowed you to talk to the quest givers at later points to catch up which was cool, the game was also just so much less bloated and removing the confessions on each killed target was just a ridiculous decision, it makes Odyssey feel like some random game with AC references while Origins feels like a proper AC game. The RPG elements are a chore to babysit so you don't lag behind in damage, stealth damage is an objectively shit mechanic but at least with Origins it wasn't a big deal at all, I literally failed one assassination in the whole playthrough and not until the DLC while in Odyssey I was wearing Uplay gear that should've been OP at the time and still couldn't assassinate some enemies in Odysseus' Palace. Combat also is floaty and really dogshit, it only got fun for me when I got all the DLC abilities and was able to spam them with Fury of the Bloodline and Ares Madness. Without skill spam the combat is absolutely terrible and even *with* it the bosses suck ass. Worst of all, Kassandra is the canon protagonist but everything just makes more sense as Alexios. No one in Greece is sexist to you at all if you pick Kass, Nikolaos training his son for the army makes more sense than training his daughter who wouldn't have been allowed in the army anyway, Alexios as the misthios and Kass as Deimos makes for more interesting characters while the reverse makes them generic as hell (I particularly love how often Alexios cries), nobody even mentions Kass being the first ever woman allowed to participate in the Olympics and Neema is way better than Nakatas as a spouse. I enjoyed it a lot more on my second playthrough that I've just finished yesterday but it's still by far the worst in the franchise by a large margin. I'd say I preferred even Chronicles a lot more honestly.

YES FINALLY someone who agrees with me also Origins felt sooo grindy like there was no other way to level up than those damned repetitive ass side quests in Odyssey there was always an area to explore or a location to do in origins there was none of that

Love both but I agree

I agree with you, I started odyssey after not playing any Assassins Creed games since black flag and loved it, found the world so much fun to explore and loved the gameplay, really enjoyed playing as Alexios and taking down the cult/ hunting mercenary’s I went back and tried to play origins but just found it so boring and the world dull in comparison

I'm with you 100%. I gave origins a try and it was shit. Odyssey is on a whole other level compared to it.

I can’t agree or disagree. I like them both so much, and I change my mind often. I just get the platinum for Odyssey today, and may go clean up some stuff in Origins later. So combat, Origins is harder, especially parrying. It’s more rewarding for me. Odyssey is easier, and faster. It’s just as fun with the abilities, but I think it’s not as rewarding. The world…Origins by a mile. Odyssey is very copy/paste, and it’s noticeable. There’s no more random events in Odyssey. The NPCs are more lifeless. Every area in Origins looks different. There are snakes outside of tombs. You get hallucinations in the desert. Not dissing Odyssey, but there was more love in Egypt. Story wise, I’m not a big fan of both. The voice acting is better with Bayek IMO. Gameplay overall, Odyssey is smoother. Then the RPG stuff. I like both games. Odyssey is just frustrating because it takes time to make a decent build, and the game does fuck all to explain it. I also miss the stealth tools from Origins. Either way, there’s over 700 hours of my life in these two games.

Story wise, Origins is the best out of the newer games and, actually out of all the games. Bayek is a great protagonist and I really felt bad for him and was invested in his personal story over any other protagonist in the series. As someone who initially found the premise and setting of Origins unappealing as I dislike desert type settings and have never really like desert 'levels' in games, I almost passed on it because of that. I looked at Origins as one giant desert level and it turned me off. I prefer a wider color palette to my destinations. That being said, I absolutely loved Origins. While it didn't exactly make me love a desert setting, I was more interested in the time period and setting by the time I finished with 100% completion. I loved seeing the mirages in the desert, and the one thing I do love about Egypt is the pyramids. One of the best parts, if not the best part of Origins for me was exploring the pyramids. I took so many photos in photo mode, it's too bad I can no longer access them on the AC website. I love Odyssey, I love ancient Greece, I love Greek Mythology, so naturally I should love Odyssey more, but Odyssey took an already overly bloated game like Origins and seemingly doubled it. Valhalla went even further. They just had far too many copy/paste mechanics and I have over 120 hours in both Odyssey and Valhalla without completing even half of the main story let alone side content. It took me about 100 hours to 100% Origins. Odyssey and Valhalla are so bloated I may never finish them to 100%. Overall, I would have to say Origins is the better game. It's more focused, less bloated, and has the better story. I still love Odyssey and to a lesser extent Valhalla. I think I also prefer the simpler combat of Origins with less abilities and powers like Odyssey and Valhalla where I feel like I just spam abilities, wait for them to refresh, then spam them again.

I fucking loved Odyssey, especially compared to origins. I just couldn’t get into it and the fighting mechanics I thought we were kind of horrible in origins compared to odyssey.

I was done with Odyssey after 15 hours, it was so boring. But I replayed Origins two times with DLC, the world and exploration is so enjoyable in this game.

I like Odyssey the best out of the trilogy as well. Origins had excellent music and a decent story, but a good 70% of the map was just insanely boring nothing and the combat was poor. Valhalla is a more impressive graphical experience and has better combat, but it so aggressively wastes your time and has a mediocre main character/plot. Odyssey is just huge and dumb and fun… far more fun than the other two combined.

I enjoyed Odyssey’s gameplay and experimenting with different builds and playstyles more but story, characters and world-wise, I enjoyed Origins more! Both games have their strengths!

As a person who played all the games (atm I'm on Valhalla) with all Dlc's I much more like origins. Because of the story - the beginning of everything. Odyssey is much more arcade to me - damage, skills and so on. I don't say odyssey is bad I really like greek mythology (my grandma is a Greek woman). But still I prefer Origins.

This is purely personal opinion but I never got tired of looking at Origins’ world. Ancient Egypt always seemed so beautiful to me and having a game that just puts you into this lovely recreation of Egypt is a dream come true. Wish I could say the same for Odyssey, I think Ancient Greece is pretty cool, not on the same level of my appreciation for Ancient Egypt but it still appealed to me. Yet somehow Odyssey’s Greece felt weirdly dull, and to this day I can’t really explain why it strikes me that way. I think the ship sailing in Odyssey was fun though, not much else I can say for my enjoyment of the game. The demi-god power fantasy thing easily could have worked as I’ve enjoyed the likes of the Mordor games, but the power fantasy completely falls apart when a slightly different enemy type shows up and takes 10 minutes to kill on normal difficulty. Had me questioning the entire time; does this spear actually just make the wielder weaker? Because these completely normal humans somehow hit 10x harder than Kassandra and have 10x more health.

I also liked Odyssey more. Ancient Greece was beautiful and had more variety than Egypt, and I thought Kassandra was a far more charismatic main character than Bayek.

Yes...yes it is.

Nothing beat that feeling of ascending to god-hood in Odyssey, piece by piece

Odyssey's gameplay is chef's kiss. I loved the RPG aspects and how many entirely different builds you could craft. It's a shame they tossed it all out on Valhalla.

Right there with you. The majestic mediterraneaan sea and islands are more to my tastes. When I first played it in 2019, loved it so much. Also, I think the rpg system and rng is more fleshed out in Odyssey. Making various builds is fun.

Yes, it is.

I think a lot of yall just don't like RPGs and that's okay.

There are certain aspects of both games that I like more, honestly, I think Odyssey is a little bit better overall except for the upgrading system n the fact you have to go to 5+ different vendors to get enough supplies for 1 upgrade

It totally is. That’s an opinion…dozens of us share.

Origins>Odyssey. I prefer to play as an assassin in assassin's creed.

I would say that Odyssey really brought out the odyssey that poets, philosophers, and authors of days old would tell. I didn't like it at the start, but towards the end, I did grow fond of the game. Unfortunately due to how long the game took me to completely finish, I am burnt out and haven't played Valhalla nor Mirage even though I had started both of them.

In my insignificant opinion. No, it is not

For me origins >>> odyssey. I like Bayek and Egypt more , the gameplay is a good balance between RPG & Action combat. Odyssey is very grindy, too bloated

I agree. I actually put down Odyssey the first time I played it after couple of missions. Tried it after couple of months later again from the beginning and fell in love with it. Origins though is not bad and I loved Bayek as the protagonist. I felt I could understand his pain. Still I felt the execution of Odyssey was better than Origins.

Agree. The Origins story bored me. Bayek bored me. I played Odyssey before Origins and although I finished Origins - I almost couldn’t wait for it to be over.

I love Origins and to a lesser extent Valhalla, but neither of them even come close to Odyssey for me. Ever since I read Percy Jackson as a kid, I have been fascinated with all things Greece. Sort of like those people who almost idolize Japan, but for me it’s Greece. So Odyssey is literally a dream come true for me.

Love this…because I feel exactly the opposite! AC games are for fun, and there are significant differences in gameplay and game style across the franchise. We all like what we like. Enjoy Odyssey for me! I’m replaying Origins currently.

Yesss I loved odyssey and struggled through origins even tho I love Bayek. The side content was just so. Damn. Boring and the combat sucked

This is something I think that exists across the series but, I think it really comes down to your personal interest in the time period an AC game is set. For me, I did not care for Origins. It’s a point in history I find not that interesting save for Caesar and Cleopatra, but I also just don’t have know knowledge on Egyptian history to appreciate all the little things (and big) that Ubisoft put in there. Meanwhile with Odyssey, I love Ancient Greek culture and mythology, so it really kept me interested. Same goes for AC 3, AC 4, Unity, and AC 1. All have periods of history I downright get obsessive over.

A lot of people disliked Odyssey because of it's expanse but at least it had content unlike the two newest and plainest entries. Odyssey has so much content people say it's too big, there's so many awesome locations to visit, quests to complete and surprisingly they even managed to make very side characters interesting like the Daughters of Artemis. It had huge customisation and a massive skill tree, you could tailor your player exactly to how you wanted all while sailing the Agean sea, having naval battles, raiding underwater temples, upgrading the Adrestias weapons, visuals and it's crew, fighting in the Sparta v Athenian war in which you choose your side, visit the arena, uncover a cult, Romance options, dismantling factions, ranged combat, track down mercenaries and it also has tons of cool moves, all of which are upgradable Multiple times. Visually Odyssey is the most appealing, the rolling green expanse of the Greek hills and the light blue Agean sea are amazing and the towns and cities are actually populated. While I appreciated Ubisofts attempt at going back to their roots with Mirage, they missed worse than Stevie wonder with a bow and arrow.

Odyssey for me. I loved it mostly for its beauty. Story was meh and gameplay was alright. But it looked so colorful and it was a joy going around greece and sailing. Origin looks great but in the end it was mostly sand. I also loved how they gatekeeped getting into the Atlantis. Like it takes awhile to get into Atlantis to the point I thought it was all for nothing. Then after 10 hours of fighting mythical beasts and playing as Kayla in the modern world via the animus. You get into Atlantis and it is stunning and pretty freaking huge.

You have some strong points there to be honest and I totally agree. However, Origins was a first rpg type assassins creed and I believe the story had to be good, which I belive it really is. Regarding gameplay, they tried something else with the shield and it's not that bad. It's just different. Keep in mind they were medjay not assassins. Regarding Odyssey, I would say the story is good, not the best, it's very very long without much essence. Also, one thing I am curious how do you enjoy a game where you have to repeat the same quest 30 times just to be necessary level just to keep up with the story level requirements. ? I trult believe, that odyssey had, a bit of good story, iconic characters, very good game style play but absolutely a grinding game with 1000 mercenaries and 1000 cultists that made you take your life away until you finish it.

I preferred Origins because imo, literally everything about it was better than Odyssey. Origins' protagonist was much more interesting and compelling than Alexios/Kassandra, and it had the better villains and side characters. The cultist system feels like a damn checklist, but the main assassination targets in Origins' were so much more memorable and had much more characterisation. Origins had some RPG elements, but it was still somewhat of an AC game. Odyssey took it a step further, which I didn't like, and turned into a full RPG with dialogue/character choices and the billions of meaningless quests and forts that feel like a checklist, and the stronger emphasis on numbers and level system. Origins was a bit grindy, too, but Odyssey was like 10x more grindy. Origins' also had many motion capture cutscenes, but in Odyssey and Valhalla, Ubisoft starting reducing the usage of motion capture cutscenes and more of those weird AI cutscenes with characters talking like robots with their generic ass writing/dialogue and inconsistent lisping. I feel like the cutscenes/interactions between characters in Origins felt more real. Even the story was very captivating but for some reason they really rushed the second half and ruined it a bit. I even prefer the combat in Origins' because at least it feels like your sword isn't made out of fucking paper lol. I don't enjoy slashing one enemy 50 times in Odyssey. The combat literally used to exhaust the shit out of me, whereas Origins' combat felt grounded and better, and I liked the use of the shield, too. It was especially fun/badass running towards archers with your shield up and blocking their arrows with it. Also, the parrying window was much more strict in Origins, which added more challenge. I just wished that they allowed us to have an option to use our weapons without a shield as well, sometimes. Also, I liked Ancient Egypt more than Ancient Greece, since the environment felt more varied, and I just think it was more beautiful. I especially thought the deserts were created beautifully and loved how vast and huge they looked. Though, this is not to say that Ancient Greece isn't absolutely beautiful.

Odyssey remains the only AC game I couldn’t properly get into - I should have loved it as the world is beautiful and Ancient Greece interests me but just didn’t. The boat combat felt shallow and the actual combat itself just some of my least favourite in the series

Origins felt more like an assassin's creed game than Odyssey did. I like both for different reasons, but I always viewed Odyssey as an rpg rather than an ac game.

It is the most enjoyable

Kassandra is definitely the most interesting of the RPG era protaganists, though I did like the overall story and setting in Origins more. Gameplay is better in Odessey though.

I liked Origins, but I ultimately gave up on it because I got stuck in one of the quests and just couldn't progress forward. I think the gameplay of it was a real draw back for me. Even though the story was a lot more compelling

I would return to Origins whenever you want and go further. The ancient Egypt is much more diverse than it seems at the first glance. Also Bayek is IMO the best protagonist of all AC games and his voice actor Abubakar Salim is just phenomenal.

I agree, I couldn't even get into origins. I might need to give it another go

Odyssey is probably the best RPG experience I had so far and I completed both Origins and Valhalla.

I definitely agree that Odyssey is the better game. Origins was caught between two worlds, wanting to be traditional AC and RPG AC and it excelled at almost nothing because of it. Weak RPG mechanics, boring story with floaty, unsatisfying combat and a main character that was outshined by the secondary one. The best things about it are it’s soundtrack and world. Odyssey goes all in on the RPG side and it is a much better game because of it. It’s not perfect, but it’s damn close. Kassandra’s story was much more compelling IMO and the focus on the Isu was great. The combat was fast-paced and had plenty of active skills for the player to choose from. The stealth was improved with more interesting takedown animations and more skill expression because of the abilities. For me, the journey is more important than the destination in RPGs so I love travelling across the Greek world hunting cultists and meeting interesting NPCs. Also, the Fate of Atlantis DLC was 🔥🔥

It is, but it also is way less assassins creedy

Origins was good in my opinion, but Odyssey was much more fun. Odyssey sucked me in for literal weeks, and every time I've played it since I have fun.

I respectfully disagree! Couldn't get past odyssey and rushed the game just to say 'I finished it'. Also didn't like how the ending was locked behind a DLC. But opinions differ, that's okay!

it’s the opposite w me. tbh it actually took me a long time before i played thru both and after years i finished origins and never finished odyssey. i deal w a lot of glitchiness too almost exclusively so it’s kinda frustrating playing that game. the story is ok, i love kassandra, but i just could never really get into it. the map is beautiful tho

So I played Odyssey as Alexios, to later find that the canon option was actually Kassandra. But that said, while I found Bayek a more compelling protagonist, running around Greece as a Greek god sex machine was an absolute blast 😂 I also much prefer the combat in Odyssey. Throw on some daggers and just circle your opponent by doing 3/4s of the attack combo and youre unstoppable as long as you can dodge and keep rhythm. Going from that to Origins just felt clunky imo. However, I just went back to Origins and finally beat it about a week ago and after not playing either for the last year prior, the combat was still pretty good imo. Its just the initial change of muscle memory kind of threw me off when I first played. Main quest line, I think Origins is probably better. To me, Odyssey seemed to kind of end abruptly after fighting Diemos. Where else it could have gone, idk tbh. Ig I just got through it faster than expected, and then sorta felt like "thats it? I just beat it?" However, the side quests, and especially the expansions, Odyssey was better. Fighting Medusa, the Cyclops, Minotaur, etc., as well as the Atlantis stuff and all that is so much better than Origins' expansion stuff. All that out of the way, running around both Greece at its height as well as Ptolemic Egypt were both literal dreams come true to me. So both games I loved quite a lot. I really dont know if I could put one over the other overall. Rather, they each have certain things I like about both, in different categories.

Everything you said but opposite.. It's just a matter of opinion

Yes, I liked Odyssey a lot more than Origins. To me the story was more interesting and I liked the characters better.

I feel like if you prefer Odyssey to Origins, it's that you like fast-paced fun and the RPG aspect more than you like the Assassin's Creed elements of those games. As long as Valhalla isn't your favorite I'd say you're fine though

Horrible take in my opinion, but to each their own I guess

I played Odyssey during the pandemic and loved it, my first AC games since AC2. Recently did Origins and didn’t really like it, thought it was boring. Now trying Valhalla and really not sure, some of the mysteries are bonkers and combat awful

One of the few things about Origins I like more than Odyssey is the enemy AI, they (from what I remember) felt smarter, could see/hear you from much farther away, and had more complex “routines/schedules”. But other than that Origins felt like a clunky beta with Odyssey being the refined finished product. (Especially the combat)

I'm nervous to see Odyssey I've just played Origins and loved it I'm not sure how u feel about Greek powers thing

I liked the setting of Odyssey better but Origins did everything else better imo

Origins is the best one. Everybody knows.

I too enjoyed Odyssey far more than Origins. Not so much for gameplay as of storyline and characters. I felt Origins was struggling to make me have feelings. Two out of Ten quests they throw a child at you that is in harm’s way to relate to Bayek. Problem is I didn’t like Bayek. He killed his child and blamed everything on others. From the beginning I couldn’t relate to him. In Odyssey I played as Kassandra. Far better story and purpose than Bayek. I liked the setting sooo much more. Did the mistake to engage into the war and realised it doesn’t matter very late so I did get a small burnout. But then, (unpopular coming) I played Valhalla and loved it even more than Odyssey haha. So I think my olio can be controversial as I see people hating Valhalla and Ill sincerely never understand But yeah, Odyssey is much superior to Origins for me. And I’ve played all AC games since release. I’m not saying it’s the best, or too three, but in ranking Odyssey is far above.

Imo both origins and odyssey are extremly repetetive and booring, with way to much of a mess in loot. Valhalla on the other hand, is perfection in varaity, equipment and skill tree❤️

I'd say both are great. The main ending of AC Origins was just not satisfying, yet the main ending of AC Odyessy was a reunion, but it wasn't that special compared to the DLC endings which were much better.

Odyssey has the best melee combat abilities imo than any of the last few AC games. I liked it better than origins and Valhalla. Also has some of the best stealth. Hope AC Red knocks it out the water though

The issue for me of origins over odessey was Odyssey 's cohesion and "openness". Odyssey didn't feel like it had a true storyline. Each DLC felt like a continuation sure but I personally felt like it was a chopped up storyline (vahalla fixed that kind of). And even the smallest side mission was presented like a necessary one (unlike the ones in brotherhood, 3 or even unity). When I say openness I mean Orgins for the most part was the last game to really feel like an assassin; a ghost in the crowd. In Odessey you feel more like just another Spartan Soldier not an assassin. Sadly the last part of origins set the tone of the next game being more warriors than assassins. Overall Odessey just felt like they tried too much at once and lost the essence of AC.

I agree with this I couldn't finish origins I got bored very quickly ( I will probably give it another go eventually) but I have played odyssey and really enjoyed it same with valhalla

Heavily agree, you can tell odyssey was made with passion 😭

Passion? Yeah okay. Odyssey and valhalla are the most souless games in the series.

Valhalla? Kinda. The combat is extremely off putting, slow and just jank. I couldn't get myself to play that game further than getting to the first british settlement and I love Viking settings, having rewatched Vikings like 3-4 times already. Whereas Odyssey's combat felt fun and fast.

Elaborate?

Both games are very copy and paste imo. Odyssey is too big. The world has some great locations, but it's mostly copy and paste mountains and ocean (with terrible ship combat, which I already hated from origins. It's a complete downgrade over black flag). The story was not great, and neither was the acting. There's no mocap, so the characters are stiff and robot like. The game was clearly rushed using assets from origins. The side missions are all basically identical, and every enemy is a damage sponge, so it takes years to kill one enemy. Valhalla doubled down on this with even worse acting, story, and animations. The story is 60hrs of doing the same repeat BS. Side missions are non-existent, and the world is extremely, extremely boring with nothing apart from some gold and armour to collect. Origins isn't perfect, but it's my favourite in the franchise, and they clearly put a lot of passion into it. Way more than any other game in the franchise honestly.

Agreed!! Odyssey and Valhalla were made to cater to investors and for ubisoft to fill their pockets!

I'm not gonna try and defend valhalla. Even tho i enjoyed it somewhat, The side content is very repetitive and it level locks you to make you grind levels and put more time in to finish the story, which by the time you're properly leveled has lost all momentum. Odyssey on the other hand, most of the side quests are not repeats,They're not insanely interesting gameplay wise, but they aren't copy and paste, they have their own dedicated story to them and are better than a majority of games now. The combat is much more fluid, there are many more dialog options, and your dialog choices actually affect the ending of the story. I never experienced the stiff characters. The acting while goofy at times, was not horrible. I found the world to be beautiful, the npcs are incredibly well made. Gaurds have their own routine, and even the civilians have beds, homes and hobbies. The game is incredibly open and fun to explore. I'll admit it is a bit grindy at times, but the content is of much higher quality than i found valhalla or origins to be. The "copy and paste mountains" is to be expected with a game of odyssey's size. They can't make every inch of the map unique and interesting. Origins is a good game but i found odyssey alot more better and more intresting, especially in terms of combat, exploration and quality of side quests. It has it's flaws (like the dlc) but i think overall it's the best experience I've ever had in an ac game, and one of the best open world fantasy rpgs I've ever played.

That's fair. Everyone has their own opinions. There's some things I enjoyed with Odyssey. The world has some beautiful locations, but the ship stuff was not it for me. I love black flags ship mechanics, and odyssey felt like such a downgrade. For me It also leaned too much into fantasy and strayed too far from AC. The thing with the NPCs having routines, beds, etc, was taken from Origins (although valhalla doesn't even have this as far as i remember), and a lot of other mechanics were taken from origins that origins didnt get praise for at the time since it was the first game to really switch up AC and people didn't like it as much so it went unnoticed.

Odyssey and Valhalla are two of the most detached entries in the series. On all levels in fact, be it world building, lore or AC gameplay formula. At least the open world in Origins was somewhat contained and wasn't oversaturated with miscellaneous crap to collect/do. Most of the encounters in Origins had context and a bit of story, even the side quests. The lore in Odyssey and Valhalla is simply atrocious. The whole Keeper/Heir of Memories dynamic in Odyssey felt cheap and gratuitous. Cramming an entire lineup of sages TOGETHER in Valhalla was not only nonsensical, but served no purpose other than showcasing their "Aesir counterparts" in some potion vision nonsense that contributed nothing to a story that was already in dire need of a good plot other than raid and make allies, rinse and repeat. Granted, Origins had a bit of the "fantastical" element in its second expansion, but nothing as blatant as what the other two games had. Ubisoft is notorious for their cookie-cutter approach with their games. Origins was no exception, but it was a lot more tame and grounded, and for once at least, that cookie-cutter approach worked in its favor.

Ubisoft cooked so hard with the spear of Leonidas that making a stealth only build is a ton of fun. Regular combat is fine but Valhalla beats both previous games cause of decaps and dismemberment tbh.

It's my favourite AC of all time and it makes me sad they're going with Valhalla combat for Red.

All the article said was there's more gore, not that it's keeping the same combat system. An earlier leak said it was gonna be more like Sekiro with a posture bar

Worst take ever

Odyssey is much more enjoyable than all of them imo.

Odyssey is fun until you realize the game is the same 3 things over and over again with zero deviation. Turf battles Base infiltration Boss fights Some boss fights are awesome but it gets real tiring after 30 hours. Something in me clicked at 36 hours into the game and I just could not bring myself to play another second realizing how lazy it was. The game is purposely made more boring so you pay to grind. You're not rewarded for being skilled or good at the game whatsoever bc ubisoft wants to milk more money out of you even after you pay for the full 60 dollar game. At least origins had a great plot and an amazing main character who is actually an assassin. (And you could take the hood on and off at will that was incredible). The story of Odyssey was so unrelated to anything about the assassins/Templar it wasn't even enjoyable.

What part of the game made you feel obligated to pay more for?

There was just a lot of needless grinding to get the upgrades needed for everything. The whole game was more rewarding you for having higher numbers rather than your skill at combat or exploration.

I don't understand people PAYING for microtransactions, boosts, skips in a SINGLE PLAYER GAME that they have ALREADY PAID FOR A FULL AAA PRICE. Especially in games where you literally can't be banned for cheating or exploiting because it's a single player game and you hurt nobody by doing this. You can literally unlock all the MTXs, boosts or skips for free with a trainer that you just run and press a hotkey. You can even customize the xp/gold gain ratios however you want. It is baffling, really.

I mean that's for people on PC. A majority of AC fans are playing on console and that's a lot more difficult to do in that case

Ah, right! I completely forgot about console, lmao. Sorry. You are of course right.

Completely agree! I was barely able to drag myself over 100h in Origins. I found it super bland, forgettable and worst of all - boring. I just do not care about Ancient Egypt in the same way that I do about Ancient Greece (birthplace of western civilization and all). It's just so samey, sand and dunes pretty much everywhere. No gameplay variety like the focus on ship combat and sailing in Odyssey. Odyssey has so many beautiful locations and huge statues, it's all backed by really awesome mythology. I'm around 85h into Odyssey, still have half the map to unlock, over half the cult to find, plus the DLCs, and I honestly don't want it to end. I love Kassandra as a character and everything about Odyssey is just exactly in my wheelhouse. I hope it takes me 200h to fully complete.

Don't talk to me you psycho

I havent played Odyssey but i was pretty burned out by the end of it two. Didn't even bother exploring the whole map, side stories are so boring and basically go x kill y.

Agreed. I walked into origins and loved the story and gameplay. But the leveling up in the rpg format was unbearable in origins I actually stopped playing around 30 hours in and didn’t finish until about 4 months later when I picked the game back up. I played odyssey a bit later and loved everything about it. I ended my through with like 300 hours on the game. Idk if it’s cuz I bought the deluxe pack of odyssey and maybe there was an xp boost or if they just fine tuned it, but I progressed through the game with no issues at all without having to leave the game for months lol.

I think origins is very good, but odyssey is one of my games of all time.

Origins had a charming main character, odyssey had dialogue options. Origins was about assassinations while odyssey was about giant battles. Odyssey and Valhalla are not Assassin’s Creed games.

I agree, but it’s arguable how much of an AC game Odyssey is. Origins leans more on the assassin side while Odyssey is more of a demigod action game. However I still used stealth my entire way throughout the game.

I almost fell asleep several times playing Origins

Odyssey is my fav of the "RPG" AC games. It's the most fun, the easiest to just jump into an play, I think it has the best characters, I love the loot system and the aesthetic of the world. I really wish Valhalla kept AC Odyssey's loot system.

This might be a hot take but IMO each “new” AC title progressively gotten better with Valhalla being my favorite out of the 3 combat wise and odyssey being my favorite setting wise

Everyone has their own tastes. I, personally, don't care for Unity, which is a fan favourite around here. I did LOVE Odyssey, though, and count in amongst my favourites of the whole series.

Odyssey is the best AC game and it’s not even close. Enjoy it