@asgardian02
This is the issue I address, that the audience is so big and everyone prefers something that the other does not. Like you, who want to play games that have melee combat and not interested in the isu arc.

@asgardian02

Playing previous entries isn't mandatory for sure, but it gives other feeling to your walkthrough. I had goosebumps hearing the reader and all the Isu members we know.

Someone who does not know the previous characters and stories will not be able to experience this. First time I played an AC entry that the story progresses, and that the previous ones matter. Nevertheless, someone who hasn't played them, will still enjoy this one.

@quor321 believe me, if you had played all the titles and invested time about their story, you would have loved valhalla's one.

@sii_frederic AC II is my favourite as well, I think AC I is underrated due to the gameplay mechanics and the repeating tones in some phases. I would put Valhalla to second place, because it is the only one which connects the dots from previous entries.
Laya wasn't interesting for me, I wanted to learn more of her back story. She was mediocre character at best. Desmond and Altair are my favourite characters. Miles didn't deserve the ending he got, there is a video of Nolan North addressing his arc and how they wanted it to continue. If they did it they way the wanted at first, we would have gotten a masterpiece.
I believe the best way to play an ac game is with the mechanics of unity. This ain't gonna happen though, we will continue with the rpg elements, but I'm glad they removed the never ending gear we had on odyssey. The gears on valhalla are unique and this is a plus for me.
I agree on the style of storytelling as well. If they give the studio as much time as it needs to produces a good sequel, I can wait as long as it takes.

@quor321 it has mentions from previous titles. The arc at America connects Eivor with Conor. You see the cutscene from 'Ragnarok' that it was first shown in Revelations, Adam and Eve reference, and many more that I can keep writing, you get the point.

I prefer having both Isu story and assassin's one. Odyssey broke the lore of the franchise and having not even one assassin, in an assassin's creed game (I don't count the dlc). Everyone has his opinion, and mine is that Odyssey is a great rpg game as a stand-alone, but a terrible attempt of making a game that continues the story of assassins. Darby McDevitt is the last good writer the studio has for AC games, he wrote Valhalla and his writing was epic, in my opinion at least.

@quor321 I tried to speak for the franchise in general. I have Valhalla in my top3 AC games, storywise of course. Satisfying this big audience- fanbase is really demanding, it is not possible making them all happy. My issue is with the developers who took notice of some complains from previous games, and changed the story almost completely, making the og fans confused and worried about the continuation. I wish they continue with the current one, which looks really promising.
Other than that, it would the first AC game that I'm gonna get the DLCs, they seem interesting.

@petrnev12 for me, Odyssey is a great rpg in particular, but it is far away of being considered a great assassin's creed game. This is another topic though that I believe it has been discussed at the forum.

Good evening from Greece and happy new year to everyone!
I wanted to discuss a topic that has not got as much attention as it should, in my opinion at least. Now that every personal view on ac valhalla has been written and discussed, I wanted to address my personal opinion not only for valhalla, but for ac in general.
IMO the biggest problem with assassin creed, is it's fanbase. Up until 2012, everybody hated Desmond.Every forum, comment, review, captured Desmond as a boring and blunt character. Ubisoft listened to the fans and killed him. After this decision, ubisoft didn't have and idea what they were doing with the franchise. We had like 5 games that the present day didn't progress a bit, and they 'finished' it in comics!!
Another issue the fanbase triggered, was the repeating tone of every new game. Even though I agree on some level, this made ubisoft changed the formula of the games, turning them into RPG. I am rpg game addict, I love playing them, but this is assassin's creed. You can't make a proper assassin's creed game with rpg elements. And we can see this in the last 3 AC games. Even though I enjoyed origins and loved Valhalla, this doesn't feel right. I want to feel like assassin, everybody wants to feel like assassin.
Unity is the most assassin's creed game we will ever have (speaking only for it's elements). Apart from its bugs and glitches, still the fanbase wanted a change, they didn't like it back then. But NOW you can see that everybody wants a game JUST LIKE IT!
Another example of this, do you think back to AC 3, they planned on bringing Desmond back as the Reader? Of course not. They did it because apparently he is likable again and we all miss him. The Grey thing Juno said, the 'find Eve' , the 'awaken the sixth' , were not meant to come back in any game! They killed her in comics! They brought these stuff back (and in a stunning way), because we cried out for a change, again! A change to a previous tone of AC. So we, as a fanbase, are also responsible on this issue. I hated ubisoft for so long killing my favourite franchise. But now I realise that we also are to blame for their decision. They should have never listened to any of those wanting Desmond removed. Let me know your view on this topic. I believe with Valhalla they did a first step of fixing their mistake. Only thing we can do is hope that they will continue with this story, and don't throw it away like they did with the previous one.