Assassins' Creed Valhalla vs. Cyperpunk 2077 - Eivor wins over V...

Even though 2021 is a few months in now, there were two prominent RPG game releases in late 2020.

Namely Cyperpunk 2077 and Assassin's Creed Valhalla.

Both were highly anticipated, and were seen as looking to move forward the open world RPG genre.

Valhalla is the latest in the Assassins' Creed franchise, coming after the well-received Odyssey. The central character, Eivor Variksson or Variksdottir (a choice of male of female characters is available) is a Norse warrior settling and raiding in England, and working for the Hidden Ones - a secret society who battle for ancient knowledge against The Order of the Ancients.

Cyperpunk 2077 is a spin-off of the Cyperpunk RPG board game set in a dystopian future of civil, criminal, and state breakdowns. amidst the incorporation of technology directly into the human body. Hollywood A-lister Keanu Reeves plays Johnny Silverhand in the game - a rock star turned anti-corporate terrorist who nuked the HQ of the game's central megacorporation, Arasaka.

I've played both extensively, and must say I feel Valhalla is better.

I do like both a lot, but there are some points here that make Valhalla better IMHO:

- Better flow

Some parts of the Cyperpunk gameplay are erratic and illogical - the police spring on you if you shoot a pedestrian. If you kill the police, more arrive and chase you, including flying drones. One can evade them and run away, or drive away, and apparently that is that.

But if one drives a vehicle into another car, this isn't illegal. So unless Night City has no road laws, or the developers neglected this, I don't know.

Valhalla on the other hand is more seamless. Killing civilians is always a no-no, no matter if they are axed, hit by shields, etc.

It maintains a better consistency and flow in this regard.

- Open world more consistent

Both games are visually stunning. Cyperpunk encapsulates a literal city and environs with a downtown/city centre, residential areas, industrial parks, skyscrapers, and extensive deserts.

Valhalla is based on representations of Norway and England, and captures the unique environments of both well.

In Cyperpunk though, exploring the open world isn't as inviting. Sure, there are streets one can traverse but not many buildings to get into.

Valhalla has rivers, oceans, streets and fields, and there are often open houses to explore as well as buildings.

Maybe it's just me but an open world should be literally this, with lots of facets to explore and engage with. I feel this is better captured with Valhalla than Cyperpunk.

Valhalla also has animals to hunt, ranging from deer, wolves, wild boar, foxes, snakes, squirrels, seals, etc. and thus adds more to the narrative of the setting. These animals would have more commonly roamed in that era and it lent to the different and more unique landscape of that time.

- Less hype

Cyperpunk is a good game. Its visuals, characters, storylines, and endings, all are well done. But I feel the hype it gained over eight years of development, as well the oft-mentioned broken gameplay promises, and the promotion and inclusion of noted Hollywood A-lister Keanu Reeves, has also contributed to it being overhyped.

I liked Johnny Silverhand as a kind of anti-hero, but the game didn't really live up to the hype after several years of development.

Valhalla is the latest in a line of a strong franchise, going since 2007, but I feel the hype wasn't as bigged up as per Cyperpunk.

- History buff bias

This is a purely personal point here but I'm a history buff and I love the Anglo-Saxon period most of all. I think it's an unappreciated place in British history, when it would not be so since it was the real formative piece of England. In short, there would be no English language, law, or culture without the Anglo-Saxons.

So having Valhalla set in this time, amidst the Norse invasions, was well done. They must have consulted historians, since the feel and realism of it is strong also. This also relates to the Norse angle too, as it is set during the time of Harald Finehair's initial unification of Norway.

The capturing of re-settled Roman London, being able to see and hunt deer, wild boar, bears, wolves, and lynxes,

Cyperpunk's setting is intriguing too, I must add. I don't know much about the board-game RPG it's based off, but the notion of integrating technology into the human body, civil breakdown, the rise and domination of megacorporations, and falling/weak governments, is a fascinating backdrop. Night City is well-designed, and captures the feel of a Western Seaboard city like LA or San Diego.

But I'll admit to some degree of bias here.

- Cyperpunk is overrated?

Is Cyperpunk 2077 overrated? I think it is.

I'm not saying it's bad.

But relative to the hype, including hiring an A-list Hollywood actor of Bill and Ted fame no less, and that it had a big fanfare in 2012 when it was announced, I feel it has been a let down from this heady press.

The stories are intriguing, including side quests of befriending a sapient vending machine, and helping characters like Judy, Panam, and Rogue.

Assassin's Creed Valhalla, whilst part of a longstanding franchise, did not receive the same fanfare, though has not had as many bugs as Cyperpunk.

- Valhalla wins

So for me, Valhalla is better overall.

Both games are visually stunning, and hold engaging characters and stories.

The gameplay on both is sound, though similar as per most RPGs.

But Valhalla to me is better scripted and also has more pervasive stories. One can play Odin in Valhalla, assassinate rival secret order leaders, and even help a network of contract-murder hires run by children.

What do you think? If you agree or disagree, all views are welcome!