I enjoyed Origins much more, and to this day still haven't finished Odyssey because I get bored at about the same time each attempt. I still think both are good games though, it's just Odyssey was a little too far down the open world hole at the wrong time for me.

Odyssey is my favourite of the two. I liked it enough that I actually am playing it again right now on PC Game Pass while I have no desire to go back to Origins. Origins was fine too but I found the main character to be kinda dull compared to Kassandra from Odyssey (I dunno how the male Odyssey main character is. I heard bits of his voice acting and made the quick decision to go with Kassandra instead. If I remember right, according to people who worked on the game, she's who was intended to be the main character until head office started hand-wringing about people not wanting to play a female protagonist so they gave you a male option. Because, you know, Ubisoft).

A thing that works quite well for Odyssey is that outside of the one main continental area that you come and go from at various points, much of the game is broken up into islands that are all handily session-sized chunks. The game has a great gameplay loop of "Show up at island, figure out what's going on, solve island's problem" and they vary what's happening on each island enough that it remains fresh. I also thought the side characters in Odyssey were more interesting

Other than that, it comes down which setting you are more interested in. Both games lean into mythology quite a bit so if you like Greek mythology more than Egyptian, or vice versa, maybe choose based on that?

I know I'm in the minority on this, but I genuinely dislike Odyssey. I just don't think it's a very good game. It got so bloated it's just a complete slog to finish and I was mostly bored the entire time I was playing it. Origins was at least interesting in how they attempted to take the series in an action RPG direction. You could tell there was thought put into things like the skill tree or the weapon ultimates.

By comparison, Odyssey is extremely paint-by-numbers. It feels like the devs were given a checklist of gameplay elements to stick in the game, told to make the game as big and grindy as possible to encourage people to visit the shop, and then went about checking off items on the list in the most generic and low-effort way possible. No individual but is necessarily bad, but it's all so uninspired.

Although, I think the real answer to the question of Origins vs. Odyssey is that you should play Syndicate instead. That's the last AC game I would consider to be quite good.

It's a tossup between whether I like one location more than the other, since I see modern Assassin's Creed as National Geographic: The Video Games. But I built my current PC around running Odyssey in 1440p, so I'll go with that.

Bayeks my guy but I think Odyssey is a way better game and I really prefer bouncing around Greece over Egypt.

Pretty much this. I really liked Bayek a lot but FemCassandra was dope as well, and the god powers made exploration a lot more fun in Odyssey. Can't get down that mountain? Just jump, no big deal.

I never did finish the DLC for Odyssey though. Removing the night cycle so you could never hide as well seemed cheap.

I played more of Odyssey in terms of hours but I still think I like Origins more. For every interesting thing in Odyssey, there are 18 cookie cutter quests. I eventually boiled my time down to the main story and solving the whole cultist thing while steadily fighting stronger mercenaries to get better gear, which worked out nicely. Then there's like a 1000 of those "find my spear(or sword), kill these bandits, or explore these caves" quests that are meaningless after the first island. At best the side stuff had some fun/interesting/funny moments with characters. And I have to mention how lame the ship combat was this time. Giant map and not one legendary ship or sea monster. Such an afterthought.

Origins just felt more focused and that worked better for me. Odyssey just feels like a TON of mostly mediocre content. Even the Atlantis DLC, which I only played the first part of, quickly fell into the same loop. Odyssey effectively killed this franchise for me. Didn't touch Valhalla, unlikely I will play Mirage.

So, Odyssey had a decent setup to the plot with the cult and all that, as well as some fun side stuff (the town where every quest ends in failure was genuinely funny), and the dialogue system did help with engagement, even though it didn't really make much difference what you said. Also, I liked Kassandra.

But Origins is my pick. It introduced me to the idea that AC could be more than it was, in a absolutely gorgeous setting full of tons of new great stuff (that Valhalla eventually drove into the dirt. Not that Valhalla is bad, just...tired), incredibly likable characters with Bayek and Aya, and an interesting story all around that didn't get too bogged down in the meta-narrative. Also, the graphics were actually better in Origins than in Odyssey, oddly enough.

I don't think you can go wrong, OP. After 27 votes, all the choices are still tied. I preferred Odyssey, but I also really enjoy Greek mythology. Plus, Kassandra is awesome (don't play as Alexios).

Witcher 3

Thanks for all the comments. It's clear that opinion is divided on this, but I think I got a good sense of the differences between the games from what you all said. Origins sounds like a slightly more focused game so I guess I'll go with Egyptian murder instead of Greek murder this time.

@isomeri: They're both bloated and rather dull but at least Egypt is a setting we haven't seen before even if it does very little for what core Assassins Creed was all about. There isn't all that much fun in parkouring and scaling buildings when nothing is taller than two stories, and level gated enemies that arbitrarily survive assassinations because your "power level" is too small certainly isn't fun. If you want to see what the new AC is all about then I would say Odyssey polished the rough edges Origins had, on top of introducing a ton more bloat. I guess it's kind of interesting to see the.. ahem.. origins of the new RPG driven gameplay they introduced with Origins.

I would say Origins by a pretty big margin. Bayek is just so good, and the content felt more meaningful. Like all of the side quests have a really nice little self-contained story, the world feels pretty alive (I think in part because there are large swathes of it with nothing happening, it feels real). Odyssey felt like the crossed the line into being a massive checklist.