The 2026 World Cup was the biggest ever staged: 104 matches, 16 host cities, 48 teams and more than 6.6 million fans through the turnstiles, obliterating the 3.6 million mark set when the United States hosted alone in 1994. But numbers only tell part of the story. The real question is what the experience was like for the supporters who travelled, queued, sang and spent their savings to be there. The answer, on the whole, is that it was excellent, with a few frustrations that future tournaments should fix.

The atmosphere inside the grounds

Fans rated every stadium at the tournament 4.4 or higher on Google, and four venues shared the top rating of 4.7 out of 5. The loudest nights came in Mexico, where the Azteca and the Monterrey venues produced atmospheres that visiting fans described as the best of their lives, and in Dallas, where AT&T Stadium's scale turned big matches into events. The most common praise in fan reviews was simple: the views were good, the food was better than expected, and the crowds were loud and friendly.

Getting there: the travel test

The tournament's biggest test was travel. Sixteen cities across three countries meant long distances between matches, and fans who followed a team across the continent faced flights, border crossings and hotel changes every few days. Those who picked one city and stayed there had a far better time: the host cities with the best transport, including Atlanta, Toronto and Mexico City, earned the strongest reviews, while fans at venues with weak public transport links reported long waits and expensive rideshares after matches.

Fan zones and the cities without tickets

For the millions of fans who could not get a ticket, the fan zones were the heart of the tournament. Every host city ran official fan zones with big screens, food and live music, and they became the places where the tournament's atmosphere was most democratic: free to enter, open to all ages and packed for the big matches. The best fan zones were the ones that felt like festivals rather than overflow areas, with local food, local music and a crowd that mixed home supporters with travelling fans.

The cost of being there

The honest truth is that World Cup 2026 was expensive. Fans who attended multiple matches reported spending thousands of dollars on tickets, flights and accommodation, and prices in host cities rose sharply during the tournament. The fans who had the best value were those who booked early, stayed outside the immediate stadium area and used fan zones for the matches they could not attend. The tournament proved that demand for the World Cup is enormous; it also proved that affordability remains the sport's biggest unsolved problem.

What fans will remember

Ask fans what they will remember, and the answers are rarely about logistics. They remember Norway beating Brazil, Cape Verde's goalkeeper making save after save, the noise at the Azteca during a storm delay, and the final whistle at MetLife as Spain lifted the trophy. The 2026 World Cup gave 6.6 million people a live memory of football at its biggest, and the reviews say it was worth the cost, the queues and the flights. That is the verdict that matters.

World Cup 2026 drew 6.6 million fans, the largest attendance in the tournament's history, and the verdict from those who were there is clear: the stadiums were excellent, the fan zones were the heart of the tournament, and the cost was high but worth it. The memories, from the Azteca to MetLife, will last far longer than the receipts.

That is the full picture for now. Keep this guide saved and check back as the story develops, because the details above will keep mattering long after the headlines move on to the next big talking point in the game.