In the past three years, I've played pretty much every piece of available content for the two games immediately preceding Valhalla. I loved these open-world takes on the Assassin's Creed formula, and Valhalla gave every impression prior to release that it would be a rollicking, Nordic-flavored capper to this strange run of oddly compelling games.
And it many ways, Valhalla is a wonder. The cold, eerie vistas of Norway are stunning to behold, even on my base PS4 system. When the light in Southern England filters through the ancient trees at golden hour, it's supremely majestic. The sense of place is spot on. 9th Century England is rendered with a perfect mix of pastoral squalor and deep magic--it's a brilliant setting for a game.
Everything else, I think, is a marked step down.
Part of it is Eivor, the enigmatic protagonist, our Viking warrior who, along with her brother Sigurd, sets up shop in southern England and start the work of bending the various kingdoms and regions to the will of the invading Danes. Eivor is...fine. But she lacks the quiet complexity of Bayek or the magnetic charisma of Kassandra, and not having an engaging protagonist is a near mortal wound, especially in a game that takes, conservatively, 70+ hours to complete.
The other big step back, for me, was the structure of this story. Rather than a long, sequenced series of events that lead one into the next, Valhalla is structured as nearly 20 individual "Arcs." These stories are largely self-contained, with their own cast of characters and central conflict, and once you resolve it (usually with yet another castle assault) those events and characters never directly influence the direction of the main story again. So at hour 60, I was in the middle of yet another story arc, and I did not feel meaningfully different than I did in hour 10, except for the fact that I could now wield two greatswords instead of one. Eivor has no central, driving goal, other than to pledge the next area, win it, pledge the next, and on and on and on.
The game attempts to mitigate this with a few Mass Effect 2-style moments where previous characters return at pivotal moments later in the story, but when I'm three Arcs beyond a fairly forgettable beat, I wasn't super stoked to see a character I did not really care about come back to give me a better battering ram, or whatever. These Arcs are filler that often feel like filler, while the more interesting story--Eivor and Sigurd's conflict and their mysterious ties to the ancient Norse gods--is constantly and frustratingly sidelined in favor of yet another meaningless story arc, yet another glowing dot on the map, yet another treasure cache that I don't need.
With Valhalla, these modern Assassin's Creed games reach their apotheosis, and also what is, to me, their breaking point. I dropped 70 hours into Eivor's story and I was relieved--and perplexed to the point of absurdity--when I reached the conclusion.
I loved Origins and Odyssey, but Valhalla overstayed its welcome and did not respect my time.
I still love my dual greatswords, though.