Back in 2025, when Ubisoft proudly announced that Assassin’s Creed Shadows had become the biggest launch in franchise history, a chorus of voices immediately started comparing it to 2020’s Valhalla. I remember scoffing at those comparisons even then, and now in 2026, with the game firmly established as a benchmark for the series, it’s even clearer how misguided that was. Ubisoft themselves were quick to shut down those parallels, and honestly, that was the most sensible thing they’d done in a while. But why? Why does it feel so unfair to put these two games side by side? Well, let me try to unpack that.

It all comes down to context. Think about the world in November 2020 when Valhalla launched. The COVID-19 pandemic had billions of people locked indoors, desperate for any form of escape. Cinemas were closed, social gatherings were banned, and there was this collective hunger for anything that could fill the long, uncertain hours. Video games became that outlet in an unprecedented way. Did Valhalla have a stellar sales performance? Absolutely. But can we really separate that success from the bizarre circumstances that cradled its release? I doubt it.

And then there was the console factor. Valhalla dropped right when the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S were arriving, generating a wave of next-gen hype that few games get to ride. It was a cross-generation title that promised better graphics, faster load times, and that irresistible “new console” smell. Everyone who snagged a PS5 or Xbox Series X wanted something to show it off, and Valhalla was right there, ready to capitalize. When you put a global lockdown together with a once-in-a-decade hardware launch, you get what Ubisoft later described internally as “the perfect storm.”

Now, ask yourself: could Shadows ever hope to replicate that storm? Of course not. The world had long since returned to normal by 2025, and no new console generation was on the horizon. Expecting Shadows to hit the same sales figures would be like asking a movie released in a normal summer to match the box office of a film that came out when there was literally nothing else to do. That’s why Ubisoft’s internal email, obtained by IGN back then, stressed that it was far “more meaningful to compare Shadows to entries like Origins, Odyssey, and Mirage—games released in more typical cycles.” And you know what? That’s exactly what I’ve been doing as a player. Compared to those games, Shadows didn’t just perform well—it set a new bar.

But wait, there’s another layer to this story that often gets overlooked. Valhalla might have sold like hotcakes, but did players actually enjoy it? The retention numbers tell a brutal tale. When I dug into the Steam achievements back then, I was stunned: nearly 78% of players never unlocked the “To England” achievement, which you get after completing the prologue. On Xbox, it was around 26%, according to True Achievements. That means a massive chunk of people bought the game, maybe played a few hours, and then never came back. It was a game that many purchased because of the hype and the lockdown boredom, not necessarily because it hooked them. So comparing Shadows to a game with such high early attrition feels almost irresponsible if we’re trying to gauge actual player satisfaction.

In contrast, Shadows demonstrated a far stronger early retention. Within days of launch, the Steam achievement data showed that 87.7% of players had finished the prologue. That’s a dramatic difference, and it tells us that players weren’t just buying Shadows because they had nothing else to do; they were genuinely sticking around. As someone who very much prefers Shadows to Valhalla, I can’t help but feel that the retention gap reflects the tighter, more engaging experience the new game offers. The numbers back up what many of us felt.

Ubisoft was wise to designate Shadows as the “new bar” internally. The game didn’t get a free pass from external events. It had to succeed on its own merits, in a competitive market where people could just as easily go outside, watch a movie, or play one of the countless other great titles releasing. And it did succeed. Within hours, it had crossed one million players, and the social media team was practically glowing with excitement. That’s not a fluke. It’s the result of delivering something the community actually wanted—a dual-protagonist system in feudal Japan, refined stealth mechanics, and a world that felt alive without being bloated.

So where does that leave us in 2026? Assassin’s Creed Shadows has proven its worth over time. It’s no longer just a launch success; it’s the template for what comes next. Ubisoft can look at its sustainable sales curve and its strong player engagement and take genuine lessons forward. Valhalla, for all its headline-grabbing billions, was a product of a moment we’ll hopefully never have to repeat. To me, that makes Shadows a cleaner, more honest triumph—one that’s entirely its own. Should we ever expect another game to match those pandemic-fueled numbers? I sincerely hope not. Let’s just enjoy the fact that a great Assassin’s Creed game can stand tall without needing the world to be on pause.