Middle-earth: Shadow of War vs Viking: Battle for Asgard
Middle-earth: Shadow of War is an action-RPG open-world game from Monolith Productions (2017) while Viking: Battle for Asgard is an action-RPG open-world game from Creative Assembly, PC Port - Hardlight (2012).
What each one is
Steam files Middle-earth: Shadow of War under Action-RPG and Open-World. In contrast, it files Viking: Battle for Asgard under Action-RPG and Open-World.
Experience an epic open-world brought to life by the award-winning Nemesis System. Forge a new Ring of Power, conquer Fortresses in massive battles and dominate Mordor with your personal orc army in Middle-earth™: Shadow of War™.
A fierce struggle is taking place within Asgard, the realm of the Norse Gods.
At a glance
| Middle-earth: Shadow of War | Viking: Battle for Asgard | |
|---|---|---|
| GamingPickz Score | 8.0/10 | 4.9/10 |
| Steam rating | Very Positive (89%, 116,690) | Mixed (51%, 2,403) |
| Critic aggregate | No aggregate | No aggregate |
| Price | $4.99 | $14.99 |
| Install size | 70 GB | — |
| Steam Deck | verified | playable |
| Released | 2017 | 2012 |
| Developer | Monolith Productions | Creative Assembly, PC Port - Hardlight |
Prices and Steam ratings are read live and move over time.
Middle-earth: Shadow of War vs Viking: Battle for Asgard, point by point
Each facet side by side. A round is marked won only where a figure settles it; feel and "which is better" carry no mark, because no number we hold decides them.
Genre and premise
Middle-earth: Shadow of WarAction-RPG open-world gameViking: Battle for AsgardAction-RPG open-world gameWhat each is filed as. Each game describes itself in full above; we do not judge a premise.
How it plays
Middle-earth: Shadow of WarOpen World, Action, RPGViking: Battle for AsgardAction, Adventure, Hack and SlashThe tags players apply most, in order of votes. A read on feel, not a verdict.
Reception
Middle-earth: Shadow of War ✓Score 8.0 · 89% on SteamViking: Battle for AsgardScore 4.9 · 51% on SteamThe GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment, critics and popularity, computed the same way for every game.
Content and scale
Middle-earth: Shadow of War116,690 reviews · 8 add-ons · 70 GBViking: Battle for Asgard2,403 reviewsReach and footprint, not quality: more reviews or a bigger install is not a better game.
Price
Middle-earth: Shadow of War ✓$4.99Viking: Battle for Asgard$14.99Read live from Steam and subject to change.
On a Steam Deck
Middle-earth: Shadow of War ✓VerifiedViking: Battle for AsgardPlayableValve's own Deck compatibility rating.
Middle-earth: Shadow of War takes 3 of the marked rounds to 0. That is only what a number can decide, not which you will enjoy more.
The two on the grid
Compare the whole catalogueMiddle-earth: Shadow of War and Viking: Battle for Asgard on the axes the GamingPickz Score is built from, on the full 0 to 100 scale so each dot is its real position. Change either axis to compare them on any measure.
2 games have both
Players. The share of Steam reviews marked positive, pulled toward the catalogue average in proportion to how few reviews stand behind it. A game with 200 reviews moves a long way toward the average; one with 200,000 barely moves at all. Without this a title sitting at 100 percent on nine reviews outranks Half-Life 2 at 98 percent on 278,000.
Popularity. A blend of two things that are not the same. Audience is how many people wrote a Steam review, which is a floor on how many played it. Reach is how many language editions of Wikipedia document the game, which is cultural footprint rather than sales. A game can score high on one and low on the other: a huge free-to-play title has audience without reach, and a landmark console exclusive has reach without a Steam audience at all. Where both exist they are averaged; where only one does, that one carries it.
- PC
Every point links to that game's entry. The value map and the reception map are fixed views of the same data.
How positions are decided
No paid placement, no favouritism, live third-party data
- Placed by the published method, not by us. Every coordinate is computed from the axis definitions and weights printed on this site. Nobody moves a point. See the axes.
- Nothing here is paid for. No sponsored placements, no promoted slots, no arrangement of any kind affects a position. If that ever changes it will be labelled and sit outside the ranking.
- No favouritism, including our own. The 16 games we have written full reviews of are scored by exactly the same formula as the other 1,510, from the same third-party inputs, and they land where it puts them. Our own opinion of a game does not enter its coordinates.
- A position is not an endorsement. It says how a game was received and what it costs, not that we recommend it. Where we do recommend something, it carries a written review with a name on it.
- Fetched from live third-party data. Player sentiment from Steam, critic aggregates as published on store pages, prices checked hourly, attention from Wikipedia. Each figure carries its source and the date it was read, and we do not adjust any of them.
Which to pick, by what you want
- The higher-rated of the two: Middle-earth: Shadow of War (GamingPickz Score 8.0)
- The cheaper right now: Middle-earth: Shadow of War ($4.99)
- Better on a Steam Deck: Middle-earth: Shadow of War (verified)
- The safer bet by weight of reviews: Middle-earth: Shadow of War (116,690 reviews)
What they have in common
Both are tagged by Steam players with:
Open WorldActionRPGSingleplayerFantasyAdventureThird PersonGore
Where they differ
ViolentStealthWarStory RichMedievalDark Fantasy
VikingsMythologyController
Tags players apply to one game and not the other.
Difficulty and who each is for
By the tags players apply, Middle-earth: Shadow of War is middle-of-the-road on difficulty. Viking: Battle for Asgard is middle-of-the-road on difficulty.
System requirements, side by side
| Middle-earth: Shadow of War | Viking: Battle for Asgard | |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum GPU | AMD HD 7870 | — |
| Minimum CPU | AMD FX-4350, 4.2 GHz / Intel Core i5-2300, 2.80 GHz | — |
| Minimum RAM | 6 GB | — |
| Install size | 70 GB | — |
Can your PC run them? Check each against your own kit: Middle-earth: Shadow of War · Viking: Battle for Asgard.
Accessibility features
Steam store pages declare 1 accessibility feature for Middle-earth: Shadow of War and 0 for Viking: Battle for Asgard. A declaration is a floor, not a review.
If you like one, also try
Common questions
How different are Middle-earth: Shadow of War and Viking: Battle for Asgard in scope?
Middle-earth: Shadow of War has drawn 116,690 Steam reviews, ships 8 add-ons and installs in 70 GB. Viking: Battle for Asgard has drawn 2,403 Steam reviews.
Is Middle-earth: Shadow of War or Viking: Battle for Asgard better?
By the GamingPickz Score, Middle-earth: Shadow of War rates higher (8.0 to 4.9). That is a composite of player sentiment, the critic aggregate and popularity, not our taste. "Better" also depends on price, length and platform, which the table above lays out.
Which is cheaper, Middle-earth: Shadow of War or Viking: Battle for Asgard?
Middle-earth: Shadow of War is cheaper right now at $4.99, against $14.99. Prices move, so this is read live from Steam and can change.
Do you rank one above the other for a fee?
No. Neither game, nor anyone else, pays for placement or a verdict here. The order and every figure come out of the same public data the rest of the site uses.
Related comparisons
How we compare, and what we will not do
The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment (adjusted for sample size), the critic aggregate and popularity, computed by the same code every ranked list on this site uses. The Steam rating label is Valve's own, reconstructed from the positive percentage and review count. Prices are read live. We do not write an opinion of which game is "better": we report the numbers and say which wins each measurable question above.