-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
AC Origins or Odyssey?
- Thread starter Like the hat?
- Start date
Origins. Egypt is beautiful and Bayek is one of the best protagonists in the series. Sadly we can't play as Aya.
It's hard for me to choose. I 100%'d both and they share a lot of the same DNA and I find both (Kassandra for Odyssey) protagonists equally charming and likable.
Pick whichever setting appeals to you more.
Pick whichever setting appeals to you more.
You basically have to do the secondary quests in both games, to level up. So neither of them is particularly 'tight'. I think people say Odyssey has more pointless stuff because there're more icons like conquests (which are easily ignored) but the secondary quests in Odyssey feel a bit more worthwhile than Origins.
I only played odyssey its really good the first half in my opinion but after that i got bored and was interested in the story anymore.
Honestly Origins has the better setting, Odyssey had better everything else. They're both great though.
Well you play her in a few missions
and the final mission/last boss
I'd take Origins over Odyssey every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Better characters
Better story
Better world
Better combat
Less boat shit
Layla was merely boring and underdeveloped as opposed to actively offputting.
Better characters
Better story
Better world
Better combat
Less boat shit
Layla was merely boring and underdeveloped as opposed to actively offputting.
Odyssey is better. Kassandra is a great protagonist and Ancient Greece is a little bit more interesting than Ancient Egypt to me. Both great though.
Origin's story is a heaping trash fire, and literally all of its missions are terrible, but I think I enjoyed the combat and encounter design more than the mashy Odessey.
Also, Egypt is truly still amazing to go through. World feels hand crafted and the game still looks stupidly good.
Also, Egypt is truly still amazing to go through. World feels hand crafted and the game still looks stupidly good.
I mean in Origins, I just ignored like a third of map that is the harsh desert.
I put 140h into origins and all its DLC. Bayek was fantastic, Ancient Egypt felt better realized world and idk how it I thought the game looked a bit better , more natural than odyssey.
I put 40h into odyssey and dropped it, there were more skills, more combat options ,more sidequests and just more and more shit to do, but i just did not care about any of it
I put 40h into odyssey and dropped it, there were more skills, more combat options ,more sidequests and just more and more shit to do, but i just did not care about any of it
Origins was really good. Egypt was amazing and diverse, Bayek was a good character. But the side quests (required to get up to level for the story missions) were painfully dull - go here, investigate, use eagle, kill, use eagle again, go somewhere and kill everyone - every single time. And the ship combat, ugh.
Upon hearing Odyssey has more padding I didn't even try it.
Upon hearing Odyssey has more padding I didn't even try it.
Origins has a better pseudo historical parallel narrative and revenge story.
Odyssey is a straight up super hero game and Kassandra is pretty great.
I don't thing you can go wrong with either.
OP
OP
Poll added. I'm going to give origins a go. I want to play both eventually. I feel like I'd like the setting of Greece more so i would rather save that one for playing on my ps5 hopefully with better loading time.
Odyssey is technically better but it's too goddamn long and stretched out, so Origins wins due to the tighter length and better protagonist.
Worth mentioning that Origins has Greek and Roman areas so you get a good feel for that architecture/people/world building.
Origins is a more focused game, with a better story. Odyssey's loop, though, kept me hooked for far longer. That game does such a good job of constantly rewarding you with better loot and interesting abilities. It's also the first time in an AC game where combat didn't feel like a slog to be avoided at all costs, thanks to those abilities.
I think Odyssey is a better game combat wise. The shield is so broken in origins and it was a really smart idea to get away from it in Odyssey. I still have barely played any Odyssey though, while I did play a shit ton of Origin. I would say go with whatever setting you like more.
Odyssey, while suffering from the same problems as Origins with being too big too long for its combat, at least had better systems it wrapped itself in like the branching cult assassinations. Origins' effort on the assassin part of the game was laughable.
But I voted both bad because they're both boring for most of the playtime.
But I voted both bad because they're both boring for most of the playtime.
Not really. The "real world" story is fairly diluted and minimized compared to earlier games.
I'd probably choose Origins if I had to pick one. Especially if you want to get through one fairly quick before Valhalla. There's not much to separate either game. Origins has the more focused story while Odyssey just has a lot more of everything. I think the Egypt setting is probably the most interesting overall, and I think it's bigger cities/towns are more well done/differentiated.
You are only setting yourself for franchise fatigue. Just skip both and wait for Valhalla, none are really must play games anyway and from the looks of it, the new one is just more of the same.
i like both. Origins for the setting, story, having a shield.
Odyssey for the exploration, more supernatural combat, ships and recruiting mechanics
I got problems with both. But ultimately i think their great games.
Odyssey for the exploration, more supernatural combat, ships and recruiting mechanics
I got problems with both. But ultimately i think their great games.
I still love both. Origins brought a new face to the AC scene. Egypt and its mythology just has that- familiar and yet- mysterious appeal of that time of history. Odyssey expands on that with more naval combat ( some people like the sea combat portions of it; I could have done with less) and it added some improvements to the gameplay.
One thing is for sure; both games are beautiful. I am looking forward to Valhalla but also playing these two in the new consoles.
One thing is for sure; both games are beautiful. I am looking forward to Valhalla but also playing these two in the new consoles.
I havent played either of them but I bought Origins on sale recently because I thought it was the one with Kassandra. Glad to hear it's still good, it'll be my first Assassin's Creed game when I finally start it.
I'm currently flip flopping between both right now, with Odyssey being the one that I have the most play time in, because I just like being in that world and doing things more than in Origins. Origins is fantastic, and since I've only just started the game after moving to a new save on One X from PS4 Pro, I haven't even begun to discover all that the game has to offer.
However, I was already a bigger fan of Ancient Greece than any other location, and I dunno, even with how obnoxiously fucking BIG Odyssey is, I love going through it. Kassandra is such a great character, and so is Bayek, but the former just oozes sass and charisma. I honestly don't know when I'll finish either, especially Odyssey, but both games are great.
Here's to Valhalla!
However, I was already a bigger fan of Ancient Greece than any other location, and I dunno, even with how obnoxiously fucking BIG Odyssey is, I love going through it. Kassandra is such a great character, and so is Bayek, but the former just oozes sass and charisma. I honestly don't know when I'll finish either, especially Odyssey, but both games are great.
Here's to Valhalla!