Assassin's Creed III

 Xbox 360
User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1402 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 738 out of 1402
  2. Mixed: 413 out of 1402
  3. Negative: 251 out of 1402
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Raikazu
    Aug 15, 2013
    7
    Another great take in the Assassin's Creed series. It's not perfect by any meas: the voice acting is poor, the characters occasionally feel far from fleshed out and the movement is not always as precise as it should be. However the cinematic quality and the general storyline is well mapped out and putting Connor in the midst of key historical events made for a very engaging experience. OneAnother great take in the Assassin's Creed series. It's not perfect by any meas: the voice acting is poor, the characters occasionally feel far from fleshed out and the movement is not always as precise as it should be. However the cinematic quality and the general storyline is well mapped out and putting Connor in the midst of key historical events made for a very engaging experience. One of the few games that made me want to research it's subjects and topics and shows that the medium can be used not just to entertain but (in a loose way) educate without losing gameplay.… Expand
  2. dubz88
    Apr 27, 2013
    7
    Assassin's Creed 3 is a game with so much potential to be an amazing game but littered with problems that prevent it from being a great game. While I did finish the game in its entirety, I felt like I wanted to give up on it multiple times throughout my time with it. However, upon completing it I quickly traded it in and haven't looked back.

    While the game doesn't take place in such    Assassin's Creed 3 is a game with so much potential to be an amazing game but littered with problems that prevent it from being a great game. While I did finish the game in its entirety, I felt like I wanted to give up on it multiple times throughout my time with it. However, upon completing it I quickly traded it in and haven't looked back.

    While the game doesn't take place in such grandiose environments such as ancient Rome and Jerusalem, early America does provide a rather interesting environment for the latest game in the series. Climbing and jumping from tree to tree while you stalk a group of British soldiers and pouncing at the right moment to unless a fury of death by tomahawk was particularly satisfying. I also enjoyed being the counter animations that Connor engages in when attacking multiple enemies and being able to use a single enemy as a human shield while being shot at by a line of muskets. This little details were the highlights of my game experience and kept me wanting to fight every British soldier I could find.

    However, this enjoyment was swiftly crushed by the numerous technical glitches I ran into it and severely underdeveloped game elements. One such element, is the hunting aspect that is introduced in the beginning of the game and becomes completely unnecessary and essentially never used again throughout the game. The Homestead missions were also more of a pain to complete rather than an enjoyment. Many of the NPCs are forgettable and I ended up forcing myself to complete this missions for the sake of completion rather than desire. The "trade" system is also underutilized, which allows you to collect crafting materials from the NPCs in the Homestead and use them to create things such as chairs and barrells to sell through a convoy to cities such as Boston and New York. I also couldn't standing the optional objectives in the majority of the missions. Some are understandable such as not being detected when eavesdropping on a conversation. However, others end up completely the destroying the enjoyment of the game such as "not touching anyone" while chasing someone through a street that the game has made more crowded for this particular mission. While these optional objectives aren't necessary to complete the mission, I wanted to complete all of the missions with the highest amount of "sync" which quickly became a fruitless endeavour if I wanted to keep my controller in tact.

    One particular feature of the game stands out above almost the rest of the game entirely, which was the naval battles. The naval battles could be a game in itself and I have not experienced anything like it before playing this game. Although, given the fact that this game should be focused on being an assassin, being the captain of ship shouldn't be the best part.

    I wanted to like Assassin's Creed 3 and it's not a bad game but it doesn't deserve the perfect scores it has received, especially in comparison to earlier entries to the franchise. I'm looking at you Ezio.    … Expand
  3. HanYolo
    May 17, 2013
    7
    Firstly I would like to say that Assassin's Creed 3 is an enjoyable game. All the elements that made the previous games so much fun are still present, but, in a similar way to Fallout: New Vegas, AC3 doesn't do much to improve upon the previous game other than a new setting. Having said that, this is good news if you loved the previous game in the series and just wanted more of the sameFirstly I would like to say that Assassin's Creed 3 is an enjoyable game. All the elements that made the previous games so much fun are still present, but, in a similar way to Fallout: New Vegas, AC3 doesn't do much to improve upon the previous game other than a new setting. Having said that, this is good news if you loved the previous game in the series and just wanted more of the same once you'd completed it.

    The new, vastly different setting and historical context does give the game a completely different feel and freshens the series. It's cool to experience a very different point in history, especially one that is so much closer to the present day, so much more relevant and set a lot closer to home for many players.

    The new setting means there are lots of trees which you can climb, which might sound novel but it's basically just the same thing as climbing a building, except your in the middle of nowhere with no reason to climb the tree...

    The naval battles are probably the biggest addition to the series (and were basically the only reason I got the game) but really don't feature that heavily in the storyline. I thought that concept would really get milked but as far as I can tell there is only one point in the game when you get to board another ship which was disappointing as it was a really promising area that was a lot of fun.

    The biggest disappointment in this game (and it was a huge disappointment) is the storyline. For most of the story I really had no idea WHY Connor was doing what he was doing, and at many times it seems like he doesn't know either. And to be honest, the game didn't really do anything to make me care. There doesn't seem to be that much of a purpose to him going around assassinating people. Every cut scene tries to add some ambiguity surrounding what's right and wrong, and who the real bad guy is, but just end up confusing everything even more. It's all left very vague. Every twist that the storyline takes just makes it worse and seems to give Connor LESS of a reason to fight. Ultimately, he's only assassinating people because he's the main character in a game called "Assassin's Creed 3".

    And the ending... Don't even get me started on the ending... It's the worst ending of any game series I've ever played. It might be the worst ending to any game series ever. Assassin's Creed (not to mention all of the fans) deserved more. This shouldn't really affect your decision to buy the game because it doesn't affect the gameplay but you will be left disappointed. I myself stared at the screen going "...is that it?..." (it's not very long either) and then sat through what must have been 20-30 minutes of credits to see if I was actually only half way through the game.

    AC3 is a fun game and if you liked the previous games you'll like this one just as much, but this game isn't reinventing the wheel. There's nothing revolutionary here (ironically).    … Expand
  4. callumjsouth
    Dec 7, 2014
    7
    Assassin's Creed III's poor combat mechanics are made up for by a game which gives us perhaps the first proper open world in an Assassin's Creed game. The story won't do much for you, neither will the weak characters in it. Multiple environments on land are there to be explored as well as the open water. The introduction of naval combat, hunting and a nifty little homestead make Assassin'sAssassin's Creed III's poor combat mechanics are made up for by a game which gives us perhaps the first proper open world in an Assassin's Creed game. The story won't do much for you, neither will the weak characters in it. Multiple environments on land are there to be explored as well as the open water. The introduction of naval combat, hunting and a nifty little homestead make Assassin's Creed III the first in the series to give us sufficient freedom.… Expand
  5. Sergiohs
    Dec 27, 2013
    7
    Great graphics and features but poor history and the main character is just not charismatic like Ezio or Altair. Lots of boring stealth missions.. Not very fun I just want to finish it quick to get to the next one..
  6. lord_jex
    Sep 11, 2013
    7
    Un titulo interesante debido a su anterior saga, pero con unos altibajos notables: Los gráficos se podría decir que incluso han empeorado respecto a los últimos Assassin's Creeds, pero lo importante aquí reside en otras cosas como la nave Aquila, sin duda algo perfecto, un gran barco disponible para realizar batallas navales, el bajo: No se puede usar en un modo libre. En mi opinión, elUn titulo interesante debido a su anterior saga, pero con unos altibajos notables: Los gráficos se podría decir que incluso han empeorado respecto a los últimos Assassin's Creeds, pero lo importante aquí reside en otras cosas como la nave Aquila, sin duda algo perfecto, un gran barco disponible para realizar batallas navales, el bajo: No se puede usar en un modo libre. En mi opinión, el nuevo traje de Connor es bueno, recordando el estilo de la saga, pero en la compra de este articulo parece haber poco en lo que elegir, otra cosa que me gusto fue la posibilidad de llamar al caballo, pero el bajo es sus continuos errores, cuando entra en el agua en ocasiones se crea un bug, al igual que es muy ficicil montarlo si vas por el bosque. Como he dicho un buen juego, no me decepcionó, pero tambien tiene errores que necesitan ser pulidos.… Expand
  7. DannVM
    Jun 27, 2014
    7
    I am big fan of the saga, but it game I thought very weak, few hours of gameplay, worst story just graphic is crazy this very beautiful.
    The person is very weak too.
  8. br_1245
    Nov 5, 2018
    7
    A ambientação e o contexto histórico são excelentes, algumas mecânicas e o ritmo por vezes deixam a desejar. Infelizmente a parte final é deveras frustrante. Tipico produto que não é ruim , mas claramente poderia ser melhor do que seu resultado final.
  9. Cementer200
    Sep 28, 2020
    7
    Assassin's Creed III is a average game. AC3 is a open world game set in America during the american revolution. The main story is good and bad the side missions and activities are great the gameplay is a upgrade from Assassin's Creed Revelations.
  10. AltairMorhen
    Jan 27, 2021
    7
    It's a shame that this game has a gameplay so fluid and pleasant (for me, the best so far), but the history it's a complete mess. Seems like ubisoft ran out with the closure, making no sense at all the relationship with Connor and Haytham... The killings were so vague and the Acquiles increases nothing to the plot... It's really a shame to see the history ruin the awesome gameplay.
  11. CloudStrife05
    Aug 17, 2021
    7
    For me AC3 just didn't do it. The story was alright and the protagonist Connor felt very bland. The one really good thing about this game was the introduction of Haytham Kenway as the antagonist.
  12. JJ2FAS4U
    Dec 28, 2021
    7
    Atmosphere: 8
    Enjoyment: 7
    Gameplay: 7
    Graphics: 8
    Music: 7
    Story: 7
    Total: 7.33
  13. Jerg4n
    Apr 7, 2023
    7
    A breath of fresh air the series needed, for better or for worse. The new physics feel smoother, the visuals are better, the combat is snappier etc. The game doesn't really do that good of a job at explaining it's mechanics to the player, which led me to not like it that much on my first playthrough, but knowing how everything worked at the start made my second playthrough way more enjoyable.
  14. Captiosus
    Nov 2, 2012
    6
    I've got 13 hours of playing the game and my thoughts are a complete mixed bag. I WANT to love this game because I enjoyed prior AC titles AND I'm a huge U.S. history geek. Thankfully, I can say it's not the era of the game that disappoints me as they've done a good job of making it feel as though you're in the colonies and 18th century cities. My disappointment stems, almost entirely,I've got 13 hours of playing the game and my thoughts are a complete mixed bag. I WANT to love this game because I enjoyed prior AC titles AND I'm a huge U.S. history geek. Thankfully, I can say it's not the era of the game that disappoints me as they've done a good job of making it feel as though you're in the colonies and 18th century cities. My disappointment stems, almost entirely, from gameplay changes. |||| First, combat feels like it's taken two steps backwards. Trying to target is an exercise in frustration. The same can be said for melee combat itself where often I find I end up button mashing - something I NEVER did in previous AC games - because the timing of counters, counter grabs, and attacks are WAY off. Ranged combat is just painful in part because of the weapons of the era (yay muzzle loaded rifle reload times!) and because the ranged weapon options are SEVERELY lacking in this iteration. |||| Second, the number and rapidity of cutscenes is ridiculous. Even my wife, who is decidedly a non-gamer, has noticed this fact, commenting on more than one occasion that she thought I was watching a movie, not playing a game. And this is someone who has seen me play damn near every Final Fantasy game for the last 15 years. There are entirely too many portions of the game, thus far, where you run from one "mission" (which was a cutscene) to another mission only to find out that, too, is a cutscene. |||| Third: New Engine equals new fun things (such as ships) but LOTS of bugs. I have died about a dozen times in Frontier because Connor has fallen through a texture - usually by a rock or tree - and then free falls for several minutes before the game considers it a "desync". Climbing objects is also riddled with bugs, especially in urban environments where it's possible for the game to glitch and not recognize a ledge as climbable in one instance but then work fine a few minutes later. |||| Fourth, and finally, the writing is terribly predictable and trite. For a game that forces you into so many cutscenes, it's sad that most of them are yawn worthy and uninspiring. ||| If I could give it a 6.5, I would, but rounding up to 7 would be too high, IMO. If you're a diehard AC fan, you'll be disappointed in the "downgrades" to the combat and Animus systems. If you're a diehard Revolutionary War geek, you'll be disappointed because (despite the ads) that only makes up a small part of the game. If you're a gamer who appreciates a good story, you'll be disappointed by the story and presentation of AC3. It's probably worth a rental, but maybe not a purchase - and certainly NOT worth a purchase PLUS the "season's pass".… Expand
  15. SeenNotScene
    Nov 28, 2012
    6
    Meh. I had a hard time completing this one. Graphics were good, fighting was pretty good, sorry was ho hum. The glitches... And so early on in the game. One of the first missions I took cover and flew straight up into the air and fell to my death. Amusing, but annoying from a AAA game. I would say rent it but you probably won't finish it. I expected much better I suppose.
  16. Necrotaur
    Dec 19, 2012
    6
    The Assassin's Creed series was in desperate need of a change of setting and protagonist. It got one, but the replacements are lackluster. The impressive architecture of Rome/Constantinople has been replaced with 2 story brick houses and the occasional tall tree. As far as storyline, it's as ham-fisted as ever. You're along for the ride at literally every major Revolutionary event but haveThe Assassin's Creed series was in desperate need of a change of setting and protagonist. It got one, but the replacements are lackluster. The impressive architecture of Rome/Constantinople has been replaced with 2 story brick houses and the occasional tall tree. As far as storyline, it's as ham-fisted as ever. You're along for the ride at literally every major Revolutionary event but have no real reason to be, all the while being preached at by various characters. Connor, being half-Native American, could have been a really interesting character, but after the introductory sequences his heritage is almost never brought up again. Controls are very awkward, and I found myself getting stuck on small objects and corners, and if I was on a horse is was almost faster if I just went on foot. Combat is simplistic enough that you could probably play it on an old NES controller, which might be a good thing considering how freaking many guards there are walking around. Seriously, it's about a 1/1 ratio of civilians to guards in major towns. The only real bright spots I found were the naval battles (I enjoyed them enough that I could almost see an expanded version of them being a standalone game) and the character of Haytham. Wading through the snow during winter was also a nice touch.… Expand
  17. cub317
    Oct 16, 2013
    6
    Unlike most people, I actually like this game better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that still doesn't mean that I love this game. As a matter of fact, I have to say that this game is average at best. This game has a lot of the same problems I have had with Assassin's Creed II, but it is still slightly better for other reasons. For one, the graphics have been very much improved.Unlike most people, I actually like this game better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that still doesn't mean that I love this game. As a matter of fact, I have to say that this game is average at best. This game has a lot of the same problems I have had with Assassin's Creed II, but it is still slightly better for other reasons. For one, the graphics have been very much improved. While they are still outdated (not on par with Skyrim or Batman Arkham City, both of which came out a year before this), they are still very good. The gameplay is not too bad either. However, after playing it, I cannot deny its many similarities with Batman Arkham City. That's essentially what the gameplay is as a matter of fact, a toned down version of the combat system in Batman Arkham City. This still makes the gameplay generic like Assassin's Creed II, however, I did love Batman Arkham City's combat system, and I am pretty glad it was used here. The game also has a little more to do in it than Rocksteady's Batman epic, however, most of these tasks are rather boring. Arkham City had Batman solving crimes, while this game has you collecting trinkets for a man you care little about. Naval battles were a nice touch to this game however. It does keep this game from getting too generic like Assassin's Creed II, but considering that they make up less than half of the game's missions, it won't help all that much. The gameplay also still has several glitches, a few of them game-breaking. If Ubisoft really wants this series to be amazing, they need to stop releasing these games with so many bugs in them. The story of this game however, still completely sucks. The present story is still in there, and should be removed from the game entirely. Its plot is confusing as heck, and is still a complete rip-off of the Matrix. As for the story set in the past, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that the story is no longer ripping off any comic books (at least, not as much as the last game). The bad news is now it is ripping off another very good movie. This time, it is ripping off Star Wars. The story has you taking control of an Assassin named Luke Skywalker, I mean Connor (who is essentially a Native American version of Batman), who has everything he loves taken from him, his tribe, his mother, everything. He then goes to a wise old mentor named Yoda, I mean Achilles, to teach him the ways of the Jedi, I mean Assassin. He also learns that one of the main villains of this game is his father named Darth Vader, I mean Haytham Kenway. Do you see where I'm saying it is a Star Wars knock-off? The game still has a very unique setting. I do love how it takes place in Colonial times, which is an era not often explored in video games. I also love how it takes place during the American Revolution, however, that does sort of add to how it is a rip-off of Star Wars, as there is another war between the Assassins and Templars happening along with the Americans and British. In Star Wars it was the Rebellion vs. The Empire along with Jedi vs. Sith. Overall, I'd say that this game is an improvement from Assassin's Creed II, but still not a game that I would call great. I'd say that this game is worth a rent at best. However, if you want something better than this, it would probably be for the best that you skip this game entirely, and spend your money on a game like Batman Arkham Asylum or Arkham City.… Expand
  18. Akuda
    Nov 22, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So I just finished Assassin's Creed 3... um... really guys? That's how you end it? I mean really?! I mean I didn't think it could get any worse after limping my way to a bar and anticlimactically killing Charles Lee (The main all-powerful bad guy in the game) by simply leaning over casually and stabbing him, but it did... So a global aurora borealis happens and then whaaa?! Nothing?! Just credits and a glimpse of the mountain alien/A.I./whatever as it walks off chiding about it's victory? I know that may seem cryptic, but that's how it fuggin ends folks! Sorry if I'm ruining this for anyone but this game deserves to be ruined. It deserves it because it soiled the hours I put into completing the great 2/3 of the game I did like.

    So right before you chase down Charles Lee, through a horribly scripted burning boat scene, I'd advise anyone playing this game right now to eject the game disc, smash it, and then send the remains to "I wonder why were going bankrupt? Oh yeah..." Ubisoft. Because that would be an infinitely better ending than the one they eventually give you.

    Oh yeah and **** pivots. C+    … Expand
  19. flexasaurus
    Nov 5, 2012
    6
    Ive been a fan of the assassins creed game since the first one, so i was pretty exited to get this game in the mail. but the overall experience was to be honest disappointing. Pacing was off, glitches and clipping, choppy frame rates made it hard to swallow. The game does have some positive qualities, but its not redeeming. "anyone remember the chase sequence with hickey?" This one isIve been a fan of the assassins creed game since the first one, so i was pretty exited to get this game in the mail. but the overall experience was to be honest disappointing. Pacing was off, glitches and clipping, choppy frame rates made it hard to swallow. The game does have some positive qualities, but its not redeeming. "anyone remember the chase sequence with hickey?" This one is defiantly the weakest assassins creed to date, definitely trading this one in. Maybe next time Ubisoft...… Expand
  20. Chrispy92
    May 8, 2013
    6
    I really wanted to enjoy this game. But there are very large flaws in it that prevent me from remembering it in a positive light.

    It does have good strengths. Colonial America feels vast and suitably unique and fresh in the usual library of swords and armor adventure games. There's always something to do, always something to take a look at and have fun with. And the cities feel very    I really wanted to enjoy this game. But there are very large flaws in it that prevent me from remembering it in a positive light.

    It does have good strengths. Colonial America feels vast and suitably unique and fresh in the usual library of swords and armor adventure games. There's always something to do, always something to take a look at and have fun with. And the cities feel very interesting and lifelike. In addition, naval combat was surprisingly fun. It felt brilliantly epic to watch and hear a ship get obliterated by a full broadside from my cannons. And the multiplayer was as unique, involving and fun as it was in previous games.

    But then the big flaws drag everything down. For a start the game is buggy as hell. This would really break the immersion of the places I was in. Sometimes an NPC would just walk between two charcacters during a cinematic. Not cool. Second was that while Haytham is an interesting character to start off as, making me wait for 6 sequences before the game opened up was not good design. Then there was the Desmond storyline, which was just utterly disappointing.The plot twists get increasingly plain stupid, the Abstergo villain turns out to be a gigantic and I never had any more reasons to start giving a damn about the whole storyline. The eventual fate of Desmond indicates Ubisoft didn't either.

    But what really breaks the game is the level design. In every mission it constantly puts secondary objectives, game-over-if-you-are-seen restrictions and boundaries everywhere. There's not even a way to turn off the optional objectives from your screen. And every time you didn't get one of them right the game just loves to remind you of your failure with a big red cross at the end of the mission. This pissed me off to no end because it made me feel as if I was being punished for not playing the game THEIR way. In an open world game, where there are often multiple solutions to a problem, this is just terrible mission design.

    I wanted to like it, but in the end, I didn't feel like it was worth the hype. Not by a long shot.    … Expand
  21. GuruJoeyy
    Dec 15, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed III really has certain aspects that make it amazing, it is beautiful, the story really draws you in (you'll actually care about your objectives), and it has some really creative ideas. I rented the game even though I had heard some very colorful choices of words about it. I though they were all exaggerating, naturally as I thought the ability to make a disappointingAssassin's Creed III really has certain aspects that make it amazing, it is beautiful, the story really draws you in (you'll actually care about your objectives), and it has some really creative ideas. I rented the game even though I had heard some very colorful choices of words about it. I though they were all exaggerating, naturally as I thought the ability to make a disappointing Assassin's Creed game wasn't technologically possible yet. I was wrong, this game is a huge disappointment when compared to it's amazing and ingenious predecessors. The combat wasn't terrible but it was very limiting and confusing because of the LACK of things to do and choose from. Upgrading was a huge part of AC2+ and was one of the best parts of the game, collecting rare and powerful armors/weapons to fill my stores intrigued me. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely still possible to get different weapons and OUTFITS, but it is a pointless waste of time. The game is piss easy if you have a double digit IQ, run from enemies until your health returns enough to slaughter 30-40 enemies with ease. I found only 2 missions challenging me in any way what so ever, the one where you kill Pitcairne and when you are chasing Charles Lee in the final mission. But more then just challenge you, they jumped you, they are missions that will be the breaking point of many players due to the fact the game doesn't prepare you for any sort of difficulty. Not to mention the lack of choice on our part about how to go about the missions. In AC2, you literally got to choose how you did every single mission, there was multiple ways to do them all. But in AC3 you have 1 set mapped course you practically HAVE to take or you'll absolutely fail. The art was beautiful though most of the time, but I found myself cringing at the sudden implementing of playstation 1 graphics at some points, such as when jumping through the window to get the guy planning Washington's assassination it literally looked like something off a playstation 1. This is only one of the many points where it surprises you. It's not a game breaking problem obviously as the beautiful world outside those couple points plenty makes up for it. But I felt it was worth mentioning. There is of course the story which was very very creative in my mind except for Connor himself. Connor came off as EXACTLY what everyone called him, Naive and gullible, and overall blind to the world around him. He quickly switched sides with a few kind/harsh words and was very quick to anger and betray. A single thing out of place and he immediately assumed the worst and never investigated further, and even if the investigating was done for him and handed to him on a silver platter he would still hold hostility towards the person that he had a misunderstanding with. Overall the worst assassin to date, possessing no qualities and a VERY disappointing ending. At first I thought he was going to forgive Charles Lee and make himself look at least a little good. But it is also clear in the story where he got his stupidity from as his father was openly shown betrayal by Charles Lee and still defended him with his life. But other then the unlikable characters, the overall story was okay, the betrayal by Haytham was interesting, considering an assassin traitor was only mentioned one time before in the first game, and NEVER has an assassin betrayed the assassin's for the templars (obviously excluding Lucy as we'll never know her true intentions considering we found out Juno who killed her is now clearly untrustworthy.). The climbing/free running mechanics which were supposed to have been smoother and better controlled, were terrible to say the least, I often found myself running up a wall 5 feet away when chasing someone and taking the slow route when climbing over things (yes I'm aware of pressing A right before you get to an object makes him go over it faster, but the timing needed is crazy if you don't get it JUST right you'll end up jumping into it and making it take EVEN longer. Over all this game is nothing compared to it's predecessors even though it had some awesome new features there were a ton of bad ones introduced as well.… Expand
  22. Xenugears
    Nov 2, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed has lost it's edge in my opinion. The spectacle is there but the specialness (for lack of a better word) is gone. The setting is different this time around and I appreciate that but the formula is basically the same. Don't get me wrong, the series is still passable and (almost) worth $60 and I'm going to keep buying them but with a little less joy and excitement. YearlyAssassin's Creed has lost it's edge in my opinion. The spectacle is there but the specialness (for lack of a better word) is gone. The setting is different this time around and I appreciate that but the formula is basically the same. Don't get me wrong, the series is still passable and (almost) worth $60 and I'm going to keep buying them but with a little less joy and excitement. Yearly releases is only hastening my exasperation. Remember Me is going to be the next Assassin's Creed and will hopefully add a surge or energy to this stealth/memory genre.… Expand
  23. bluejay3463
    Nov 5, 2012
    6
    This game could have been a 9 except for one major problem.

    Bugs... lots of them. I have had to restart numerous missions because of bugs freezing missions, causing me to be stuck in the world, or causing some kind of failure. I could even accept the confusing and crappy UI in places, particularly in trading and crafting which is barely explained and way more complicated than it    This game could have been a 9 except for one major problem.

    Bugs... lots of them. I have had to restart numerous missions because of bugs freezing missions, causing me to be stuck in the world, or causing some kind of failure.

    I could even accept the confusing and crappy UI in places, particularly in trading and crafting which is barely explained and way more complicated than it should be. I even accept that there are going to be some glitches in an open world game.

    But the number of bugs in this game is far too great to be excused.    … Expand
  24. HarryManback
    Nov 11, 2012
    6
    Single player:
    Games are basically interactive movies at this point. In a movie, you would not have a character get built up like he is going to have one hell of a fight ahead of him and then not have a payoff at the end. That would be piss poor writing (or The Great White Hype). The problem is, that is what this movie does. Ezio was supposed to be teaching Desmond how to become a world    Single player:
    Games are basically interactive movies at this point. In a movie, you would not have a character get built up like he is going to have one hell of a fight ahead of him and then not have a payoff at the end. That would be piss poor writing (or The Great White Hype). The problem is, that is what this movie does. Ezio was supposed to be teaching Desmond how to become a world class assassin. Instead, we get an ending with no payoff for all the work Desmond has put in. Just a bland ending to the "trilogy".

    Multiplayer:
    Some refinements have been made to the multiplayer. If you liked the previous installments, chances are, you are going to like this one.    … Expand
  25. dherrick
    Nov 10, 2012
    6
    While this was my second favorite AC game in respect to the story, I was disappointed by some major aspects of the gameplay. I do not think it was necessary to have a ridiculous number of homestead quests while the world was full of glitches. Ubisoft could have fixed those and saved us from the monotony of those side missions. Falling through the world and having achievements broken toWhile this was my second favorite AC game in respect to the story, I was disappointed by some major aspects of the gameplay. I do not think it was necessary to have a ridiculous number of homestead quests while the world was full of glitches. Ubisoft could have fixed those and saved us from the monotony of those side missions. Falling through the world and having achievements broken to the point of needing to replay the entire game are not fun (only to name two of the many mentioned by others). This game could have earned a 9-10, but overlooked problems hurt how this title will be remembered. Time outside of the main story was spent in the wrong places. If you are a huge AC fan, wait to buy this until they fix the problems or you will risk having a poor experience.… Expand
  26. hawaiianhappy
    Nov 11, 2012
    6
    If I were to rank the games in order I would put assassins creed 2 at the top, brotherhood second, assassins creed 1 third, this game 4th, and revelations 5th. The game could be summarized as mediocre. Setting: The main story contains large detailed maps, but the problem is that it doesn't have any large buildings to climb like in assassins creed 2 and brotherhood or even revelations,If I were to rank the games in order I would put assassins creed 2 at the top, brotherhood second, assassins creed 1 third, this game 4th, and revelations 5th. The game could be summarized as mediocre. Setting: The main story contains large detailed maps, but the problem is that it doesn't have any large buildings to climb like in assassins creed 2 and brotherhood or even revelations, not only that the game doesn't have that beautiful setting like Venice, I really loved Venice in assassins creed 2, it's a very colorful place, plenty of fun things in the game. Puzzles. Assassins creed 2 had tons of puzzles and they revealed pieces of a truth that was really fun. Every time I completed one i looked at what I've gathered to add more to this truth story, more importantly the puzzles had history to them and conspiracy theories, it actually gets pretty creepy. Brotherhood did the same but not to the same extent. So far I have not found anything like this, but I'm guessing they didn't do it...

    Story: It's ok, Gameplay: not as many personal assassinations. I find myself in a lot of missions where you have to run in and kill all the guards like a wild man, no stealth at all. I like putting in multiple objectives though. There are a lot of bugs, I sometimes find my character spazzing out and just standing still and taking hits. The health system is lousy, it's basically assassins creed 1, no potions, regenerate health. The combat system is probably the worst of all the games, and here is why, you have the occasional QUICK **** TIME EVENTS. I just finished resident evil 6 and at this point i never want to touch QTE AGAIN. But lo and behold this game had to put that in the game. It's not as many as RE6 but seriously, why the hell did they do this? Why does the world think QTE = gameplay??? Seriously the combat could be interpreted as QTE. Wolf attacks you, game prompts O, you hit O, then prompts square. It feels like god of war like QTE, but the thing about god of war is that you aren't forced to do QTE, that's only if you choose to grab. Side missions: There are plenty of those, so that's good.

    Some of the bugs ive seen: People talking without moving their mouths in a cutscene, guard who wont die, my character spazzing out. One of the three will happen every hour.

    There was this one part where you have to be an eagle and follow another fire eagle... here we witness something I like to call "Crazy Camera Mode." You get to this one point where you hit the mountains and a white light comes and next thing you know you see winter trees right in front of you. It's **** how the camera works here. Graphics are fine, nothing new though

    Overall it gets a 6/10. It has a lot of problems but nothing makes it unplayable.    … Expand
  27. chujfugh
    Dec 30, 2012
    6
    What is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the gamesWhat is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the games liking, and most of the missions don't involve stealth but when they do it's controller- snappingly obtuse. Is it hack and slash combat? Maybe, because there are plenty enemies in one vicinity at once and jumping in there taking them all out Arkham-style is really fun, but the game wants you to be unnoticed, you know, with the big inconspicuous hood and all, so killing everyone that looks at you funny isn't the optimal solution. Is it the naval missions? No, they're awesome in their own right and I love them, but they only appear in two of the story missions. Well done! You've done a story mission! Now you have the pleasure of being able to do something absolutely **** tedious. So no, AC3 has no core mechanic and remains an unfocused and buggy game throughout. The sidequests are dull too, with the hunting not being rewarded with anything but being pretty cool despite that. Let's just take a look back to Assassin's Creed 1, where it's core mechanic was Assassinating, hence the title. It was repetitive and you spent too much time faffing about, but at least it was a game about assassinating with just a set of tools and a target so you can find your own way to take out the enemy, whatever way you would like too. Over the years, the series has added so many more useless gimmicks that the series has become completely unfocused. I guess I should give credit where credit is due, the combat system being fast, fun and intuitive, the graphics are incredible, the aforementioned naval missions are extremely engaging and I really loved them, the new Assassin's Armour is the best one yet, the overall historical accuracy being, well, historically accurate, the writing is excellent, even though the story is conveluted and barely connected to the original Assassin's Creed story-line, the menu's are really well designed, the free-running is the best I've seen in a game, even though it does get a bit too contextual at times, and it's a fresh departure from the series that takes away the scrambled **** from the previous games. However, the scrambled eggs it took away from the previous games that made them less intuitive and focused, it completely dropped the assassinating bit, so this just becomes an unfocused generic action game, whereas its predecessors were quite original at the time and remained fun whilst also being a bit too easy. This one suffers from being a bit too easy as well, I died most of the time because Connor did something stupid. For an open world sandbox game, this needs to be less contextual, because it gets on my nerves when I cant climb up a wall unless the contextual 'Climb up the wall' button shows up. This was a problem with the previous games as well, I just want to be able to run freely without needing to press the correct button at the correct time. As an Englishman, I felt uncomfortable killng my own men, but I just got used to it over time. See, this is also a problem about the game, its set in a war that's only interesting to American Patriots and to no one else. Connor brutalising Englishman because he's not wearing the same colour as them makes Connor look like the biggest monster of them all, especially when you can't exactly demonize people sodding off later on because they couldn't be bothered any more, or maybe I'm just biased. The French renaissance would of been a much more interesting setting, because in 1775 America, there aren't any big buildings to go free running on and the whole running part is a lot less fun. But at the same time in France there are heads being chopped off, the peasants vs. the Aristocracy, there's a much more believable side you can take without being gung-ho American patriot or gung-ho French patriot. Civil wars are much more interesting, oh, what about the American civil war? Where enough time has gone by for there to be cool buildings to jump around on, war is becoming industrialised, and it's the brutal slave-owning savages of the south vs. the freedom fighting civilised north, and there's a war on so there's plenty of killing for your liking, and hey, they could of had mid-19th century Connor bump fists with Lincoln. Sure, the north outnumbered the south 2:1 but it's better than the boring old redcoats. This game is overall a pretty mixed bag, and if you do consider playing it, don't go in with your expectations too high, like I did. If you go into it with the knowledge that it's an average game, you'll come out feeling satisfied.… Expand
  28. netcoder
    Nov 6, 2012
    6
    While I think that AC2 is still the best in the series, AC3 has a little something, despite all the frustrations, annoyances and glitches the game has.

    I was surprised to read on different forums that only a small fraction of the AC players consider the series to be in the stealth genre. It is indeed a stealth game series with emphasis on what we now know as Active Stealth: the act of    While I think that AC2 is still the best in the series, AC3 has a little something, despite all the frustrations, annoyances and glitches the game has.

    I was surprised to read on different forums that only a small fraction of the AC players consider the series to be in the stealth genre. It is indeed a stealth game series with emphasis on what we now know as Active Stealth: the act of blending in crowds and using NPCs to your advantage.

    While AC3 also has the stealth aspect of the series, it also has an extended combat system. However, the game barely makes an effort to push you to use stealth, you will have to push yourself instead. Sadly, notoriety is so easy to erase that you end up incognito too often and just walk around the streets of Boston after killing half an army and tearing down a few posters. I really wished they change that, by using some sort of a timer per example, where your notoriety goes down a few minutes after bribing a crier or a printer. Unfortunately, it's not the case so I just arrange to always keep Level 1 notoriety at all times: it makes the stealth a lot more enjoyable. The thing that is great about the stealth approach, although not for everyone, is that it's now more difficult than ever, provided you have some notoriety of course. There aren't huge crowds moving around in the streets, and the latter are wide, forcing you to plan your approach carefully to avoid guards and patrols as you navigate the cities. NPCs also react faster, which means you can't just walk the street and randomly kill baddies without anyone noticing anymore. Enemies spot you sooner than in previous installments, and may even give chase if you start sprinting while they are watching you. Speaking of chases, those are crazy hard even if you know your way around an Assassin's Creed chase. Guards run faster, spot you from further and you'll sometime be running around for several minutes before finally managing to escape. It's tense, it's difficult, and it's one of the best aspect of this game, especially with the new tools.

    The worst thing about this game is that it could have be so much more. Unwelcome additions are the naval battles and the homestead trading parts that are utterly useless. Fortunately you can mostly ignore them, but it pains me to see that a great deal of effort was put in these features, effort that could have been put somewhere else, like quality assurance or level design. Speaking of which, level design is subpar: the story missions are for the majority tedious and linear. While the writing is good, the story is somewhat short. The side missions seem rushed, don't feel like actual missions, and mainly consist of walking around the city killing guards or speaking with NPCs. The controls have changed greatly from the previous games as well. Free running is now done simply by holding the right trigger. Climbing can now be done without holding the right trigger, which is a little bit annoying when trying to carefully grab a ledge, only for our Assassin to jump
    2 meters high and grab the next one. They finally added mechanics to vault over low objects which is a welcome addition. The
    combat is similar to previous versions, although it took me a while to understand that I needed to NOT hold down the right
    trigger to actually do anything.

    In conclusion, while it is an enjoyable game, while it has a lot of potential, the game is ridden with glitches and bad design
    decisions that take a lot of fun out of it. Instead of breaking what was working and fixing what was broken, they could just
    have reused the previous installments basic systems and add new abilities and content. It could have been a much better game in retrospect.    … Expand
  29. Abobo
    Nov 9, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed 3 is exactly what people should have expected. This game should not have been hyped nearly as much as it was. It is just as good if not slightly better than revelations. Don't expect something as innovative, charming, or impressive as Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed Revelations or have followed the entire series and don't mind more of the same with shinier graphics; BUYAssassin's Creed 3 is exactly what people should have expected. This game should not have been hyped nearly as much as it was. It is just as good if not slightly better than revelations. Don't expect something as innovative, charming, or impressive as Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed Revelations or have followed the entire series and don't mind more of the same with shinier graphics; BUY THIS GAME IMMEDIATELY! But if you are anything like me and are sick of these uninspired sequels to the once great series known as Assassin's Creed; then leave it alone. Don't even wait for the price to go down, just see it as what it is: a cash-in.… Expand
  30. 0phidi4n
    Dec 6, 2012
    6
    I can't even progress into the game and from what i have played from a rental so far it isn't living up to the previous installments. Popular video games seem to all being going the duirection of an interactive cinematic. Anyways, why i can't progress I am assuming is a glitch. Suppose to shoot these TNT barrels but when it is time to do the simple instructions which lock you into the modeI can't even progress into the game and from what i have played from a rental so far it isn't living up to the previous installments. Popular video games seem to all being going the duirection of an interactive cinematic. Anyways, why i can't progress I am assuming is a glitch. Suppose to shoot these TNT barrels but when it is time to do the simple instructions which lock you into the mode with no way to back out the hand cannon decides to just vanish from your arsenal with no way to fire with any buttons or confangled puzzle solving. Restarting didn't even seem to fix it. Maybe I am missing this complicated procedure in a seemingly washed out monkey finger game.… Expand
  31. TheCapDemon4
    Dec 6, 2012
    6
    K LikE g00d game but like why is their old guns??!?!?!?!?!?! I want my m14's!!!!! Like evry Game these days ha m14's and rpgs but this gam DOESNT! Lol imma o back to cod
  32. guest1321
    Jan 15, 2013
    6
    I really expected this game to be a lot better than it was, and not in the over hype way, but in the sense that it looked like a solid game and fundamentally it was going to build off of it's predecessors in an exciting setting. Welp, it turns out that in building on it's predecessors it managed to throw every possible pointless side mission into the game without regards for how it fit in.I really expected this game to be a lot better than it was, and not in the over hype way, but in the sense that it looked like a solid game and fundamentally it was going to build off of it's predecessors in an exciting setting. Welp, it turns out that in building on it's predecessors it managed to throw every possible pointless side mission into the game without regards for how it fit in. This is really raw analogy but it felt as though someone dipped their game making paintbrush into a bucket of game idea paint, and just splattered it on a canvas. That may sound like a gross exaggeration but if you look at everything besides the story line it really does feel that way. You literally have to do none of the side missions and for the most part the game does a terrible job of informing you on the various systems mechanics. There is crafting and trading, sailing, liberation, hunting, guilds, postal missions, view points, gambling, and a bunch of other stuff, that if you ignored it would make little to no difference on your game it seems. I hate to knock this game because it really did have some cool moments but there were a lot of other points where I was just banging my head and asking "why!?". I'm happy that I finished the game but I really felt like it was a push for me to take interest in this one, especially after having played 2, brotherhood, and revelations within a 3 week period. I think a lot of the time I felt overwhelmed and not in the good exploratory sense, but in the sense that completing this game (story plus extras), just seemed like a task that I had no interest in taking on. To contextualize, in past games I never collected the feathers, but I always bought everything I could and upgraded everything and completed all the side missions. In this game it felt like there was too much that I just felt like the incentive did not exist for me continue playing past the story. It is a shame because I thought this one would surprise me but unfortunately it was a huge let down.… Expand
  33. ikenyon1
    Mar 4, 2013
    6
    I really wanted to like this game, I spent all of 2012 waiting for this game after Revelations. But boy was I in for a letdown from day 1. The first third of the story is basically a glorified cinematic and offers little for character development. Once the story finally starts to pick up I still was waiting for more to happen and by the end I was extremely underwhelmed. The thing that madeI really wanted to like this game, I spent all of 2012 waiting for this game after Revelations. But boy was I in for a letdown from day 1. The first third of the story is basically a glorified cinematic and offers little for character development. Once the story finally starts to pick up I still was waiting for more to happen and by the end I was extremely underwhelmed. The thing that made the past games so great was the character development. I really felt like I cared for Ezio but I do not feel that here. Connor is unlikeable and stubborn and this broke the game more than the numerous glitches that I encountered. I had really high hopes and GOTY thoughts but it proved to be nothing more than that.… Expand
  34. catswithtophats
    Oct 31, 2012
    6
    First of all, let me be clear, I've been an Assassin's Creed fan from day one. I followed the development of every single game since it's conception. I have all the games, all the books, most of the merchandise. I even did some internshipping at Ubisoft to work on Brotherhood. I would go as far to say I'm a diehard fan. This is why, it pains me to say this. Appart from Revelations and theFirst of all, let me be clear, I've been an Assassin's Creed fan from day one. I followed the development of every single game since it's conception. I have all the games, all the books, most of the merchandise. I even did some internshipping at Ubisoft to work on Brotherhood. I would go as far to say I'm a diehard fan. This is why, it pains me to say this. Appart from Revelations and the games on other handhelds, this is the weakest Assassin's creed and a blemish on the overall series. Don't get me wrong, it's not terrible and has fun parts, but it's an average game that is part of an overall franchise that stays away from the average. Let me break it down, so you see where I'm coming from and to make it clear I'm not "trolling".

    The Cons:

    The glitches. Oh, the glitches. This game is FULL of them. There have been a few that have made me chuckle, like a horse getting stuck on top of a house or a man stretching out like crazy after I hit him. The ones that really upset me though, where the game breaking ones. Such as guns missing from parts where you need to shoot, being unable to fire, escort missions where the NPC will get caught in a wall, the protagonist just falling though the floor into oblivion, the NPC's shooting through buildings. There's been several times I needed to restart due to a glitch. I'd let some of them slide, but this is an AAA title and there should never be glitches that break a game. This is 2012 for Christ sake. The AI is terrible too. You could be walking down a street, with no notoriety and suddenly five guards will come out of nowhere and kill you. Or you could be super wanted and walk by- even punch a guard- without getting them to attack you. The horse back riding is so bad... oh man. Horses- when shot- will fall over. They'll also fall over randomly when you hit a glich and die. The combat, now different than the other AC's, is like trying to drive a minivan with a popped tire. You'll lose half your health just taking out a group of guys. Guarding and countering doesn't work anymore. And good luck dodging. For some reason Muskets in 1777 are as accurate as sniper rifles now. huh. It starts out slow- I wont say spoilers, but it's about 4 to 5 hours in before you actually get to the meat of the game.

    There all a lot of cut-scenes. It sorta brings you out of the game and it feels, sometimes, like a movie, but overall it's not that big of an issue. Pros:

    It's BEAUTIFUL. More beautiful than AC2 or Skyrim or fallout. This game will make love to your eyes.
    The soundtrack is amazing too. The ship battles. Yeah, it's a learning curve, but it's not terrible. It becomes really fun later-on

    Climbing on trees and free-running are smooth like butter. It feels fresh and natural. Connor is a very easily controlled character and you'll just have fun running around in the forest, The Protagonist. Shockingly, Connor is a really interesting character. Hunting is fun. There's no better feeling than stealth killing a bear from a tree. I can honestly say, as a "hardcore" assassin's creed fan, I was disappointed. I had very high hopes for this game, and I even expected something better than AC2. I'd recommend you play it, but don't go in with the high expectations of the people and reviews that are giving it 10/10 or perfects. I'd go in expecting an average game and you wont be too let down.    … Expand
  35. Dankratas
    Nov 3, 2012
    6
    The combat mechanics definitely took a step (or even 2) backwards. The beginning of the game is extremely boring(specially on the ship. Go talk to someone, then back to your room to end the day. Next day, do it all over again). All the cut scenes really don't help. On the 360 version while walking in the city objects appear out of nowhere (probably because of a low field of view). TheThe combat mechanics definitely took a step (or even 2) backwards. The beginning of the game is extremely boring(specially on the ship. Go talk to someone, then back to your room to end the day. Next day, do it all over again). All the cut scenes really don't help. On the 360 version while walking in the city objects appear out of nowhere (probably because of a low field of view). The older games did not have this problem(maybe because there were a lot more buildings and they blocked other streets so you wouldn't be able to see this problem? But I doubt that. AC/AC2/AC:B/AC:R just didn't have this problem) How you uncover your map is also a pain in the ass. I DON'T want to go EVERYWHERE, I want to climb a tall building and uncover a part just like in the older AC. The story is perfect, but it is annoying to enjoy the story when everythin else is worse compared to the older AC games… Expand
  36. OMGitzSARS
    Nov 5, 2012
    6
    This likely won't be a new position, but I'll start my review by stating that I've played every single Assassin's Creed game through to completion - 1, 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations, playing 1 and 2 twice each. I'm not some newcomer to the series. Which is why I am pained to say that AC3 is a massive let-down. To begin with, players are thrust into the series' running protagonist,This likely won't be a new position, but I'll start my review by stating that I've played every single Assassin's Creed game through to completion - 1, 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations, playing 1 and 2 twice each. I'm not some newcomer to the series. Which is why I am pained to say that AC3 is a massive let-down. To begin with, players are thrust into the series' running protagonist, Desmond Miles in a moderately interesting first sequence that serves as an intro to new players and a refresher for series veterans. This sequence contains an irritatingly un-skippable tutorial on how to perform free-running actions (hint: hold RT and the game chooses where you go. It's that blindingly simple). The tutorial grinds on for an agonizing 10 minutes or so. It was not a good omen of things to come. As other reviewers have mentioned, the first (almost) 10 hours of the game is essentially a drawn-out intro to the game. I'm probably a good 7 hours in and I still haven't gotten access to the second city, New York. C'mon dev's - cut me loose. The exposition is a painfully long slog through various new (and old) AC gameplay elements, including the new hunting "feature" (clearly added in order for devs to talk about something at trade shows), the fun-as-it-sounds accounting system for your new homestead, and the surprisingly exciting naval combat sequences. Obviously, since my campaign experience is not yet complete, I cannot review it to its fullest; however, I can (and will) review gameplay mechanics. They are, to put it mildly, frustrating. Holding RT to free run was touted by Ubisoft as a 'revolutionary' gameplay choice. "You no longer need to hold both RT and A to free run / parcour / climb," they said. Well, frankly, this change should not have been implemented. There's a reason why the two were separated. In the old system, players could run by holding RT in order to sprint around roads within towns, without needing to worry about accidentally climbing up buildings or onto market carts. With the new one button system, I find myself wanting to run around towns, but having Connor consistently trying to run up a building instead of staying confined to the ground. Its a frustrating and entirely unnecessary element to the game that serves to make me hate each increasing moment I spend in the AC3 world. Couple this with the intensely finnicky combat system and the game is more of a chore to play than an exercise in enjoyment. The combat system just feels less refined than in prior games, including the very clunky system of AC1. Parrying / countering attacks is intensely hit-and-miss, with Connor performing the action with maybe half of my button presses. Moreover, the game asserts that hitting X after parrying with B should perform a counter move in which Connor attacks his attacker. This does not happen. Ever. As a result, combat becomes yet another chore, in addition to running between objectives. But what about free-running? Surely that must be good, right? Nope. AC3 has given players less of a choice of where Connor free-runs and has seemingly introduced a system where the game makes jumping choices for the player. On the surface, this may seem like a positive, but when you're in a chase and you want Connor to jump from a roof to another and instead he jumps on the chimney of the first house, causing another death, it gets old. I analogize this new system to an overly-tuned auto-aim feature in a FPS game. Too much auto aim and you find your character aiming at enemies that you aren't trying to attack. All in all, it seems to me that Ubisoft tried to do too much with AC3. The gameplay mechanics worked much better in AC2, Brotherhood, and Revelations. Freerunning was more fluid, combat was more fluid, everything was simply *easier*. And not easier in a sense of difficulty level. Easier, in that the system made more sense. I knew where Connor would go, because I would point him in that direction and execute the proper button sequence (RT to run on the ground, RT+A to run). Combat was much less hit-and-miss. When I pressed the button to counter, Ezio would counter. Simple as that. AC3 is more of a chore to me than a game. I want to finish it because I want to see how the story plays out. But with every increasing minute I play AC3, I find myself wanting to play less AC3. And all of this doesn't even touch the other issues I've run into. One hard freeze, where my Xbox completely locked up in the middle of a story mission, one where my character motions were in 50% speed until I restarted my console and an assassination mission where, after killing my target, the completion sequence did not trigger, so I was forced to do another restart. And when gameplay mechanics are decidedly below-average, re-doing a mission because of technical glitches becomes an extreme irritant. I wanted to love AC3. I really did. And the work put in makes it clear that the devs did too. They just tried to do too much.… Expand
  37. VolkerGTAV
    Nov 6, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've been a huge fan of the game and series... until now. The new combat mechnics just dont play or feel right. The big final of the game, is a f*** **** I really do not understand how Ubisoft makes that. I'm really disapointed with AC III. I think, the better in the game it's the Connor's history. It is good. The animals, the ships, the battleships, the cinematics (a few bugs). But that's all.… Expand
  38. McFungus
    Nov 11, 2012
    6
    As I was playing Assassins Creed 3 I realised that all of the oranges I had in my fruit bowl had started to go green and furry looking.
    Like Tennis balls.
    Tennis balls that emit a strange smell. As a man of science I can only presume that this occurred by way of radiation emitted by Assassins Creed 3. In summation, do not under any circumstances allow Assassins Creed 3 near your bowl    As I was playing Assassins Creed 3 I realised that all of the oranges I had in my fruit bowl had started to go green and furry looking.
    Like Tennis balls.
    Tennis balls that emit a strange smell.
    As a man of science I can only presume that this occurred by way of radiation emitted by Assassins Creed 3.

    In summation, do not under any circumstances allow Assassins Creed 3 near your bowl of oranges.    … Expand
  39. edziubudzik
    Nov 25, 2012
    6
    Terrible story, very bad voice acting, pathetic cut scenes BUT a very well designed open world, many side nice missions and challenges and a LOT to do.
  40. mattk
    Nov 30, 2012
    6
    They managed to take Assassin's Creed and limit the fun parts of gameplay and focus almost exclusively on the story. To put it simply, this game feels like a (boring) movie that makes you do all the leg work. You're probably not playing this game to tie down the rigging on a ship or needlessly escort characters to multiple houses (with no action in between) for a 20 minute mission--butThey managed to take Assassin's Creed and limit the fun parts of gameplay and focus almost exclusively on the story. To put it simply, this game feels like a (boring) movie that makes you do all the leg work. You're probably not playing this game to tie down the rigging on a ship or needlessly escort characters to multiple houses (with no action in between) for a 20 minute mission--but that's what you'll get. This game was a pretty big disappointment. It takes about an hour and a half just to get to the beginning of the real gameplay (where they show "ASSASSIN's CREED) on the screen. Even at the point, you have to start over with another character and do some mundane tasks like playing hide and seek with kids--this is where the game should've started.… Expand
  41. beerbaron7
    Dec 21, 2012
    6
    If you're a fan of the previous Assassin's Creed games, you will most certainly enjoy this and get your money's worth, as it is more of the same. However, the end product feels very rushed and unpolished. It is full of graphical and gameplay glitches, and at times frustrating, hacky level design that will pull you out of the experience. There is little attention to detail. I would hesitateIf you're a fan of the previous Assassin's Creed games, you will most certainly enjoy this and get your money's worth, as it is more of the same. However, the end product feels very rushed and unpolished. It is full of graphical and gameplay glitches, and at times frustrating, hacky level design that will pull you out of the experience. There is little attention to detail. I would hesitate to even call it a triple A title by today's standards.

    The story is enjoyable. Everything that takes place within the animus is engrossing and entertaining--however, once again (in my opinion) the Desmond arc is ultimately boring, underwhelming and unfulfilling.    … Expand
  42. jul320
    Dec 26, 2012
    6
    Not as great as the whole altair and ezio games that came before. Story wise, the prologue was dragged out a bit if you ask me and I hated the ending. But mobility to traverse the world, new hunting system, and missions for the homestead were great.
  43. WalkingJ-Dog
    Feb 26, 2013
    6
    I don't understand why people think this game is so good the main assassin for the first time is really stupid and he complains about everything even though he is supposed to be a assassin and the bugs and glitches i encountered in this game were so frustrating and it took the fun out of the game
  44. Sean-M
    Jul 23, 2020
    6
    This is the milking process. This is not really a good game. Maybe one of the worst in the series.
  45. NBAluke579
    Sep 24, 2013
    6
    This game is the definition of a major disappointment. It had so much potential to be amazing, and instead we got a very mediocre game. Extremely mediocre honestly. Where do I even start. The combat is stiff and restricting, the free-running is annoying and a step backwards from previous games, the enemy a.i is bad, the map is uninteresting and not even fun to explore and worst of all:TheThis game is the definition of a major disappointment. It had so much potential to be amazing, and instead we got a very mediocre game. Extremely mediocre honestly. Where do I even start. The combat is stiff and restricting, the free-running is annoying and a step backwards from previous games, the enemy a.i is bad, the map is uninteresting and not even fun to explore and worst of all:The game is boring to play. I mean there were a few good moments in the game, but there's not enough of them to truly say this is a good game. The game was so boring at some points, I was nearly put to tears. The protagonist is dull, the main missions are repetitive and restricting, and the map is a chore to explore.The game is beautiful to look at, but that's about it. Oh and I forgot to mention how the game's ending is awful. This game sucks. My rating: 6.1/10… Expand
  46. Rem
    Nov 11, 2013
    6
    I am one of those that truly adored the Assassin's Creed franchise. AC2 was the peak of the series as it showed how you can combine the free running mechanic and still give you an insane amount of freedom. Here in Assassin's Creed 3, that sort of freedom is absent. If you haven't brushed up on your previous games, prepare to get confused as it throws many aspects from previous games intoI am one of those that truly adored the Assassin's Creed franchise. AC2 was the peak of the series as it showed how you can combine the free running mechanic and still give you an insane amount of freedom. Here in Assassin's Creed 3, that sort of freedom is absent. If you haven't brushed up on your previous games, prepare to get confused as it throws many aspects from previous games into the main story. What bugged me the most is that most of the missions in the game are just plain too restricting and tedious. Eavesdropping missions are certainly not a good way to past the time as I recall replaying one mission eight times because I had to play a very specific way. The game tries to make up for this by introducing a huge amount of side activities. Hunting, crafting, looting, underground, and delivery missions are present, but it just isn't any interesting. A couple positives I do have to mention is the fact that combat is more entertaining than ever. Freerunning is also simpler than ever. However the biggest surprise is the naval combat, which are easily the best parts of the game. Yet with obvious improvements even in the graphical department, there are plenty of technical issues in the game, and they certainly annoyed me. Overall Assassin's Creed 3 gets caught trying to do too much with so little. It is easily the weakest entry in the series and a disappointing sendoff to Desmond Miles, not like his story was compelling anyways.… Expand
  47. twos
    Apr 25, 2017
    6
    Writing this review after having played black flag and the interlacing story arcs have in fact improved the game for me, I wasn't really won over by this game ended up rushing through it as quick as I could just to get the story and then moved on to black flag which I loved. I've played through most of the assassins creed games to date and have been reasonably entertained but despiteWriting this review after having played black flag and the interlacing story arcs have in fact improved the game for me, I wasn't really won over by this game ended up rushing through it as quick as I could just to get the story and then moved on to black flag which I loved. I've played through most of the assassins creed games to date and have been reasonably entertained but despite people calling this game a breath of fresh air I just didn't feel enough difference in game-play or connection to the plot to draw me in. Even if you don't play this game you should definitely try black flag, takes all the best aspects of this and creates something excellent.… Expand
  48. thelostuchiha
    Jun 7, 2013
    6
    Assassin's creed 3 is not the perfect sequel AC fans have been waiting for, Dose it live up to the hype? No. It has lackluster side missions except the naval missions), a convoluted story overall, and some game play hiccups. What it dos have is some solid voice acting, and fun combat.
  49. joao1198pedro
    Oct 27, 2013
    6
    after a very disapointing game(assassin's creed revelations)there wans't how make a worst game,the story of assassin's creed 3 can be good but the rest of the game isnt so good.
  50. notgay
    Oct 31, 2013
    6
    This game might be entertaining, but it is a little bit boring. The storyline is a bit too draggy too. I liked the soundtrack of this game, A LOT. I think ubisoft should not have added 4 sequences of us playing as Haytham, because playing as him is extremely boring.
  51. Marsonra
    Jun 18, 2014
    6
    Assassin's Creed III. Before I reviewed this game I played Assassin's Creed II. Most people seemed to love that game, but for some reason, I didn't. I thought the game was just plain overrated, and was mediocre at best. It's a game that you should really try before you buy. Having played through the sequel now, I have to say that this game has improved upon its predecessor in most ofAssassin's Creed III. Before I reviewed this game I played Assassin's Creed II. Most people seemed to love that game, but for some reason, I didn't. I thought the game was just plain overrated, and was mediocre at best. It's a game that you should really try before you buy. Having played through the sequel now, I have to say that this game has improved upon its predecessor in most of its flaws. So, does this game present a nice rendition of the American Revolution, or was it the right move for this game not to written in the U.S. Constitution? Let's find out. The gameplay of this game is definitely better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that's not really saying much. The game is still little more than Grand Theft Auto set during the American Revolution. It provides quite a bit for an open world game, but is still nothing we haven't seen before. Of course, there are no cars to steal and drive, so you pretty much have to run everywhere. Running in this game can be fun, but it still isn't nearly as fun as stealing someone's car, and driving off. The open world is set in the cities of Boston and New York in the 1700s. There's a lot to enjoy in these cities. There are plenty of missions to undertake, a few mini games, and even some enemy bases to take. There's a lot to enjoy in these two cities, along with the wilderness surrounding them, but none of it will blow your socks off as none of it is anything we haven't seen before. The combat in this game is literally a copy and paste of the Batman Arkham series. It is an improvement over Assassin's Creed II's clunky combat, but it is still hard to excuse that it just stole this from Batman. It has many of the same beat'em up mechanics. The stealth is slightly different however. Despite this, the stealth in this game is actually worse than Arkham's. It can be hard to figure out when the perfect time to switch to stealth is, and when to beat people up. This can detract from the overall experience, and make it much less fun. Overall though, the gameplay of Assassin's Creed III is an improvement upon the second game, but is still nothing we haven't seen before. The graphics on the other hand, have had a huge improvement from the second Assassin's Creed. This time, they are actually great looking. In fact they are on par with many of the games released on the Xbox 360. It is not as good as Just Cause 2 or Grand Theft Auto IV, but it is still a beautiful looking game nonetheless. The characters and environments all look very good and rich with detail in this game. They may not be on par with some of its competitors, but they still look very good. As for the story, that's the only part of this game that has unfortunately seen no improvement over its predecessor. The story in this game is still absolutely terrible, just like the last game. The first thing I noticed after completing the story was how much of the game was a complete rip-off of Star Wars. Seriously, the main villain of this game is actually the main character's father, and his reveal is just terrible compared to Darth Vader's reveal to being Luke's father in Star Wars the Empire Strikes Back. Also there is a war within a war going on between the Assassin's and Templars while the Americans are fighting the British. This is basically the same thing as the Jedi fighting the Sith during the war between the Rebellion and the Empire. Also, the main character once again has everything taken from him, and it is almost exactly the same as Luke Skywalker this time. As for the storyline set in the present, all I can say is this: remove it. Just remove it from this game entirely. It is everyone's least favorite part of the story. It just makes the plot of this game more confusing than it should be, and it is still a Matrix rip-off. Plus, the ending is so terrible! I won't spoil it, but let's just say the main character has to make a choice, and you don't even get to make it for him! Overall, the story of this game is about as bad as a video game story can get. Overall, this game took several steps forward, but then it took several steps back. It is a decent game, but still not enough to take it out of a worth a rent status. It is better than ACII, but still not that great. I recommend this game to anyone who likes the American Revolution. Everyone else should just rent it, and nothing else.
    Gameplay: 6/10
    Graphics: 8/10
    Story: 3/10
    Overall: 6/10    … Expand
  52. PatrickBowes
    Apr 13, 2014
    6
    This game being my first time playing anything from the Assassin's Creed franchise I was very impressed at how the story plays out, the game play, and just the look back in history premise these games bring. If you were to ask me what I thought about this game a little over a year ago I would have said it was fantastic!
    However after playing AC2, I became more and more disappointed in    This game being my first time playing anything from the Assassin's Creed franchise I was very impressed at how the story plays out, the game play, and just the look back in history premise these games bring. If you were to ask me what I thought about this game a little over a year ago I would have said it was fantastic!
    However after playing AC2, I became more and more disappointed in what AC3 was.
    This is still a good game (don't get me wrong) but it just does not compare to the previous entries in the franchise.    … Expand
  53. threeName
    Jun 15, 2014
    6
    Assassin's Creed III continues the experiences of Desmond and the team, and moves on to two new ancestors of Desmond, Haytham & Connor, who are father and son respectfully. AC3 takes forever to get started, you actually play as Connor, but for the first two sequences you play as Haytham. This become rather droll and the story in the overall game moves very slow and with uneven speed. ThisAssassin's Creed III continues the experiences of Desmond and the team, and moves on to two new ancestors of Desmond, Haytham & Connor, who are father and son respectfully. AC3 takes forever to get started, you actually play as Connor, but for the first two sequences you play as Haytham. This become rather droll and the story in the overall game moves very slow and with uneven speed. This iteration of the series is also very cinematic heavy, you'll perhaps do 3-5 minutes of actual playing followed by a 1 - 2 minute cinematic (you can skip the cinematics, but then the plot is basically meaningless). This iteration feels very much rushed, a lot of things go wrong in the game.

    As most people have reviewed this game is plagued with bugs and glitches, now I actually am a game programmer myself (I even have a degree in it), and some of the bugs that have gotten through quality control are absolutely absurd. I had hoped that a few years down the road that most of the important and game break bugs would be fixed, but they aren't. I know the Xbox 360 doesn't have the most advanced hardware specs and given the size of the worlds the Assassin's Creed series has come to be known for, but this is a bit too much.

    I can't count the number of times I'll be walking (this is later in the game around sequence 9 for whatever reason) and I'll be incognito and walk past a guard and suddenly all the guards in the area will attack me as if I had been Notoriety Level 3. This is awful, because it happens repeatedly, and I'm not talking 1 or 2 guards, I'm talking upwards of 7 - 10, not all of them infantry that can be killed using simply counters. I've also seen (and took a picture, wish I could post it) a manikin sitting on the seat of a hay trailer, it's like the texture for whatever person was supposed to be there is missing so what I see if the plain white model of a human. Also something you'll notice and these are actually acceptable bugs considering the limitations of the hardware, but texture pop-ins are a thing you'll have to get used too. You can be riding your horse and getting to a bridge and clearly see that when your about 50 meters from the bridge the higher resolution texture will pop-in and if you're running in a grassy area you can see the grass actually grow right in front of you. They just overlay the ground ahead of the player with a texture of grass, then as you get closer to be able to interact with it they pop the model in, well it's like watching time move fast because the grass will grow right before your very eyes.

    I'm hoping that future iterations of the Assassin's Creed series will be benefited by the new hardware from the Xbox One and Playstation 4. I'd suggest you play this game only for the story to find what becomes of Desmond, but if you're looking for the charming character development like Ezio or anything like Brotherhood/II you'll be sadly disappointed.    … Expand
  54. Master_Taffer
    Aug 13, 2014
    6
    AC III has problems. It's the ultimate example of AC's "everything and the kitchen sink" design philosphy where they decided to keep piling features in like it was a hoagie. It doesn't work, and results in a muddled experience. The story takes a more serious turn as we follow Connor, a man with a very black and white view of the world entering the morally gray colonial period. ConnorAC III has problems. It's the ultimate example of AC's "everything and the kitchen sink" design philosphy where they decided to keep piling features in like it was a hoagie. It doesn't work, and results in a muddled experience. The story takes a more serious turn as we follow Connor, a man with a very black and white view of the world entering the morally gray colonial period. Connor is a great character, earnest and sincere, who is not served well by the poor implementation of the time period. It's just a stiff, uninteresting mess all around. Multiplayer is once again its saving grace.… Expand
  55. banda89
    Mar 18, 2016
    6
    What happened? AC2 and AC Brotherhood where great games, Revelations was a glorified DLC. But I thought they would make AC3 amazing.
    It had potential, but unfortunately we got Connor (sigh). Couldn't care less for him, even the missions with his father were better than what we got from him. Can't remember much of the storyline and frankly I didn't care for him. The bow and tomahawk were    What happened? AC2 and AC Brotherhood where great games, Revelations was a glorified DLC. But I thought they would make AC3 amazing.
    It had potential, but unfortunately we got Connor (sigh). Couldn't care less for him, even the missions with his father were better than what we got from him. Can't remember much of the storyline and frankly I didn't care for him. The bow and tomahawk were great. But i just couln't get into it.    … Expand
  56. cish
    Oct 20, 2015
    6
    Huge step back from the previous games. Really dropped the ball with the revolutionary war, which could have been way better. No memorable city landmarks or things to climb. Just really not a good assassin's creed race.
  57. Kostas101
    Dec 16, 2021
    6
    I honestly never really enjoyed the linearity of Assassin's Creed, so many trailing missions, clunky controls and frustrating gameplay mechanics. In the end, it's a decent game that tries it's best to be a stealth focused game, and it does succeed in some areas.
  58. david01126
    Jul 1, 2020
    6
    I'm torn between good and mediocre. Connor is the absolute worst protagonist in the series, but Haytham is a brilliant one. The new controls are worse than the old ones. But what saves the game is the sailing
  59. Borz5
    Oct 1, 2021
    6
    The game is buggy and it has many glitches. Some of them are really annoying. The main caracter is well designed and maybe my favourite protagonist in the franchise yet. If you are a fan give it a try but be forgiving about the bugs, nonsense AI behaviour, and strange detection system.
  60. Dartza
    Jul 21, 2023
    6
    A disappointing entry in a franchise that was starting to come in to it's own. While characters in AC 1 and 2 sprout up in future entries and even get sequels, the original characters from AC3 are forgotten and with good reason.
  61. M1sfiT
    Sep 3, 2023
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamessss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!… Expand
  62. ghola
    Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Nothing revolutionary here. It´s an OK AC game.
    PROS: -AnvilNext Engine is superb, and, surprisingly, not very glitchy, given the GIGANTIC environments.
    -TONS of missions. -Commanding your frigate is GREAT ! CONS: -Ultra dumbed-down controls: everything seems automatic. You just press RT and move forward. Parkour inside the houses ? No, no: it´s just a cinematic. -Tree    Nothing revolutionary here. It´s an OK AC game.
    PROS: -AnvilNext Engine is superb, and, surprisingly, not very glitchy, given the GIGANTIC environments.
    -TONS of missions.
    -Commanding your frigate is GREAT !
    CONS:
    -Ultra dumbed-down controls: everything seems automatic. You just press RT and move forward. Parkour inside the houses ? No, no: it´s just a cinematic.
    -Tree Parkour is great, but since there are no clear visual clues to where you can hop on the trees, you will be, most of the time, riding a horse or walking, A LOT.
    -The American Independence war story and sites are not as appealing as previous AC´s plots. Besides, an african-american as a master assassin and a native-american so fondly helping the founding fathers is too far-fetched.
    -Very cliché father-son sub-plots, inside and outside the animus. You´ve seen this before ...
    -A 5-year-old child can combat in this game.    … Expand
  63. aadms
    Nov 6, 2013
    5
    Because I trust user reviews over magazine reviews, I waited close to a year before purchasing it in the bargin bin. I wasn't disappointed. This was the worst game of the series. At times the story felt exhilerating and epic, but mostly it felt lame and dull. The large expansive world that they added falls flat when they give you such a large area with nothing interesting to do in it.Because I trust user reviews over magazine reviews, I waited close to a year before purchasing it in the bargin bin. I wasn't disappointed. This was the worst game of the series. At times the story felt exhilerating and epic, but mostly it felt lame and dull. The large expansive world that they added falls flat when they give you such a large area with nothing interesting to do in it. For a game to have been out for a year and still be as buggy as this game makes no sense. It was as bad as the very first Assassin's Creed, yet that one got a pass because it was the first...this is the fifth game of the series! Way too many redcoats in town that prevent you from stealth. If you jump up on a roof, it's like you ignited a hornets nest and spend most of your time running for your life. Combat it ridicolous now because you regenerate your health very quickly, and so does your enemy apparently as it takes about fifteen hits with your tomohawk to kill them. Some assassin, can't stealth and can't kill. Such a shame because the did a great job with the graphics, Boston and New York, the ships, and the voice acting was the best of the series.… Expand
  64. godWhisperer
    Nov 7, 2012
    5
    I fell in love with Assassin's Creed with the second game, and that game is still magic for me today. ACIII is massive, there are a ton of things to do, but so much of it feels meaningless or trivial, and some of the historical missions are so blatantly forced into the game and so badly done (Paul Revere's ride, for example) that it's amazing to that they made it into a game of thisI fell in love with Assassin's Creed with the second game, and that game is still magic for me today. ACIII is massive, there are a ton of things to do, but so much of it feels meaningless or trivial, and some of the historical missions are so blatantly forced into the game and so badly done (Paul Revere's ride, for example) that it's amazing to that they made it into a game of this magnitude. There are anachronistic missions and controls problems that seem like they'd more likely be seen in a game with far less of a budget than ACIII had and, overall, this game is a complete disappointment for me. In the two years I waited for this game I never expected that I would have beaten it and sold it back within the first week of release, but here I am. Ubisoft hasn't put out a good AC game since Brotherhood and it's time to find a more inspired series not relegated to the role of cash cow.… Expand
  65. Redfordsto
    Mar 14, 2013
    5
    There's a departure here from the classic Assassin's Creed format. The graphic are slightly improved, the implausible Sci-fi plot remains, and the combat is great. But this like Brotherhood feels more like an excuse to milk the franchise by acting a period piece that is intriguing than a progression of the overall story. Let's not forget that Desmond is the real main character. Yet I'mThere's a departure here from the classic Assassin's Creed format. The graphic are slightly improved, the implausible Sci-fi plot remains, and the combat is great. But this like Brotherhood feels more like an excuse to milk the franchise by acting a period piece that is intriguing than a progression of the overall story. Let's not forget that Desmond is the real main character. Yet I'm left feeling that over the course of 4-5 games, Desmond has made no progress as a character. Nor have his supporting players. The main characters suffer for the sake of an ancestor's story. It's becoming frustrating especially since the end is so near." I just keep wondering how many more games they can squeeze out of this franchise. Finally, as I've noted in multiple reviews before, the ending of a game or movie or any story is crucial to how it is perceived. If the ending is bad, that's the last you'll remember of the game. Not just the story was flawed, but the broken final mission as well. As a result, I was left with a "this is it?" moment that was just annoying.… Expand
  66. rocketpackpanda
    Mar 25, 2013
    5
    This is what happens when the second game in your series is incredible. You have nowhere else to go so instead you throw in chair making and lumber delivery. It then takes various parts of Red Dead redmptions hunting aspect and fails at them on every level, integration and execution. these are just two of the few problems plaguing the third entry in the series. No longer do you assassinateThis is what happens when the second game in your series is incredible. You have nowhere else to go so instead you throw in chair making and lumber delivery. It then takes various parts of Red Dead redmptions hunting aspect and fails at them on every level, integration and execution. these are just two of the few problems plaguing the third entry in the series. No longer do you assassinate people. That entire mechanic has been so castrated that the game is no longer about it. Compounding this is a serious case of the Kojima's. Overly long cinematics interspersed with a little bit of gameplay. From an artistic standpoint, the game falters from blandness. In AC1 and 2, every local was distinct, in had its own life. This new game misses that, everything feels the same, artistically bland.
    On the plus side, even though the game fails to use its setting properly, the controls show definite promise for use in these environments.    … Expand
  67. Neian
    Nov 27, 2013
    5
    My biggest gripe with this game is the disjointed and fractured storyline. It's like they forgot to do some of the cinematic cut scenes that explain how a particular situation ended up. You have to try to gleam from the conversations between your character and NPCs later what really went down when you finish a mission that is important but the details are left out. Game play itself isMy biggest gripe with this game is the disjointed and fractured storyline. It's like they forgot to do some of the cinematic cut scenes that explain how a particular situation ended up. You have to try to gleam from the conversations between your character and NPCs later what really went down when you finish a mission that is important but the details are left out. Game play itself is just like all other AC in my opinion, naval battles are okay, and the trading aspect is pretty stupid. Overall would of had a better score if the story had been checked by someone without ADHD before production.… Expand
  68. NoMoreNiceGuy
    Jan 10, 2013
    5
    Looking for an Assassin's Creed game? Go somewhere. In previous AC games you had to eavesdrop, sneak and silently Assassinate bad guys. Not anymore just grab a musket and go guns blazing in the field, sneaking happens only a few times, and eagle vision are only used twice. The key word in the title of this game is "Assassin" but you never assassinate anymore. There are of course newLooking for an Assassin's Creed game? Go somewhere. In previous AC games you had to eavesdrop, sneak and silently Assassinate bad guys. Not anymore just grab a musket and go guns blazing in the field, sneaking happens only a few times, and eagle vision are only used twice. The key word in the title of this game is "Assassin" but you never assassinate anymore. There are of course new characters, but they are so poorly made its sad, you will find yourself liking the bad-guy more. the only thing that saves this game is the naval missions. and that's it, the controls are really basic, "RT+RS forward" and the game plays it self.

    TL;DR? this AC game is so casual it's on the same level as CoD, Angry Birds and FIFA    … Expand
  69. VaaderDj19
    Nov 1, 2012
    5
    Disclaimer: I have not finished the game, these are my impressions after playing around with for a couple of hours and going through possibly the first 30-60 mins of actual content. I am hoping that the rest of the game helps me reassess and give it a higher mark.

    This game is proving to be a major disappointment at the moment. The franchise was in a dire need of a shakeup because the    Disclaimer: I have not finished the game, these are my impressions after playing around with for a couple of hours and going through possibly the first 30-60 mins of actual content. I am hoping that the rest of the game helps me reassess and give it a higher mark.

    This game is proving to be a major disappointment at the moment. The franchise was in a dire need of a shakeup because the formula after revelations had certainly become stale. However, this game while trying to break the mould really suffers from poor implementation and in my humble opinion its been released at least 2 months too soon. It's glitchy, i had my graphics go completely blurry the first time i was asked to take a pistol shot and had to quit the game for it to be fixed. Camera angles during sword play are wonky, especially the first sword fight you get in which i guess is kind of a tutorial, you end up losing sight of your opponent when you knock him down. I got desynchronized in the fight coz my opponent somehow managed to fall into the ocean when we were fighting inside the ship!!! (graphics are crazy).

    The control system feels clunky and the smooth swordplay of the previous iterations has completely disappeared. You cannot hack and slash, and each button press leads to an attacking sword thrust. This can only be done when facing an armed opponent, because it is an integral fighting mechanic, you cannot slash thin air and you because fighting is dependent on there being a foe present ur never going to miss. The dodge and counter is an attempt to mimic Rocksteady's Batman franchise, with red indicators appearing over the attackers but neither is the mechanic explained and even when you get it right the fight seems clunky and not at all satisfying. (Granted i am still getting used to it, but it just feels really clunky).

    A lot of control has been taken away from the player, free running has been dumbed down and this results in it just feeling clunky. Plus since you hardly have control anymore its really random what areas you can climb and what areas you can't. And sometimes there is no good reason why you cannot climb some areas. Attacking civilians has been prohibited and you can no longer just start fist fights with them too. (I haven't been able to at least). Silly and frustrating Gimmicks Floating almanac pages, wtf? its a silly gimmick but the worst one is the new lock picking mechanism. OMG, if you thought lock picking in Skyrim was frustrating then welcome to the crude rip off that is Assassins Creed 3. You need to rotate both analog sticks in a manner that your fingers and hands are in the most unnatural position ever and then mash right trigger. If you are unlucky and just move your fingers a fraction you need to start again and there is a time limit to boot. Its frustrating and uncomfortable, I wouldn't be surprised if people sue Ubisoft for causing them Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

    The story (disclaimer still stands) so far is just meandering along, its like setting the base for what is to come and in all honesty i am like 90% sure where its going and if it as predictable then not only is it dumb but completely unnecessary. IGN points out that the first couple of hours of this game are just boring and while playing it i tend to agree. The paying customer would have been better served if these sections were shown to the player as a mini series promoting the game launch aka Forward unto Dawn. Imagine having to play Lasky's childhood before controlling Master Chief or imagine having to go through boring tasks as Ezio's dad instead of the fun stuff Ezio the teenage boy did. The story just doesn't have the pace, wit and character that Ezio's had in its early moments at least. All in all am persevering with this game at this moment because of the money i have dropped on it and the hope that it gets better. If this had been the first game of the series, I would have given up on it.    … Expand
  70. soczi84
    Feb 7, 2013
    5
    Seriously... I haven't been able to finish this game. It is one of the least entertaining things Ubisoft has spat out lately. Boring, boring, boring... This used to be a sandbox game about stabbing people and climbing interesting buildings. Now it is a game about building villages, chasing pigs, sailing and making some crappy caravans (who the hell created that mechanic??). Cities? Gone.Seriously... I haven't been able to finish this game. It is one of the least entertaining things Ubisoft has spat out lately. Boring, boring, boring... This used to be a sandbox game about stabbing people and climbing interesting buildings. Now it is a game about building villages, chasing pigs, sailing and making some crappy caravans (who the hell created that mechanic??). Cities? Gone. Interesting fight system? Gone. Everything that used to be fun in AC2 and Brotherhood gone. Yeah... The frontier setting looks nice but it gets old pretty quick when every single mission requires you to run to the other end of the map. Not to mention bugs. The one that was VERY annoying for me was that the fighting style didn't change when you switched from tomahawk to dagger. It was hilarious to see Connor HACK his enemies with a dagger in hand. I mean... who the f... let this thing out of QA?

    It is quite disappointing to see Ubisoft fall so hard on it's face on this one. This was supposed to be a crown jewel but it FAILS completely to live to it's hype. All the good things from AC2 were wasted and it is very obvious that a different team did this piece of crap.    … Expand
  71. CoolDadTx
    Jan 24, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Is this the worst AC to date? Possibly. If you ignore Relevations then yes. This game is so far from everything that made AC fun that it shouldn't even bear the title. Worse is that it is also the buggiest game in the series.

    Let's start with the positives: The present timeline is finished up, thankful. I always thought Desmond was stupid and I'm so glad it is over. But, of course, they'll likely just keep sending us to the present in future installments anyway. The other thing that was good was the horrible vehicles don't recur.

    Now the bad - Hatham and the first 3 or 4 sequences. They add absolutely nothing to the story and Hatham is almost as bad as Desmond. It would have been enough to assume the lineage was possible and move on.

    Tree running is painful. Forget the fact that (unlike every other AC game) most trees you cannot climb. Basically you're running around looking for a tree to climb (or a convenient rock to run up) so you can tree run. It's funny that you can climb building but a tree branch 5' off the ground cannot be used. Even worse is that once you get to the top the leaves are in the way so you don't know where you can leap from without dying. It also seems they have 2 models for trees to sync with because each time I used the exact same tree climbing. The whole naval thing doesn't make sense. A young man suddenly captaining a ship? That's just stupid. I wish they would stick with the fun parts of AC. That brings us to the RTS aspects they keep stuffing into the game. I don't want to micro-manage supplies, builders and caravans. That is dull but I'm forced to in order to make money to buy stuff I need. Attention Ubisoft - if I want to do resource mgmt I'll go to work. They also added QTEs to this game. Unfortunately the timing is off and it happens way too often. Out in the woods, suddenly attacking by a predator, QTE or die. Boring and lame...

    It is clear the original designers of the game have left the team because this game is all about RTS and FPS concepts. Stealth is all but impossible outside of rural areas. On a roof? Guards pick you off from the ground. Trying to take a fort? Guards keep respawning and have the ability to pick you off no matter where you hide. If I were a real assassin I would go for combat as a last resort. Yet AC keeps adding more and more combat moves rather than stealth components. Even worse is that there are no so many commands that there aren't enough controls so commands are contextual. I long for the days of stealthy AC. Bring back the original devs Ubisoft. The current team misses the point of what made the original games fun.

    The minigames are so unfair they aren't fun but the side quests are at least entertaining. Of course there is some collectibles too but I don't like how you really have to collect everything in order to open up upgrades. The environment and people are dull. I am not at all excited about this poor backdrop for the game. It just doesn't live up to Italy or Jerusalem. It's like they had a small budget so they implemented a minimal set. I hate that this is the final game in the series.

    Now the bugs. There are lots of them on even the latest patch. 1) Around and in forts guards respawn almost immediately. Once I killed a guard turned around the other way and turned back and the guard had respawned next to his own dead body. In forts it is a blood bath such that your best bet is to just run to the goals as fast as you can.
    2) Enemies are really, really sensitive. On several occasions a guard with their back to me and me in a tree behind them was suddenly picked off even though I wasn't even moving.
    3) Minigames - The players seem to look too far ahead such that winning is luck more than skill.
    4) QTEs are timed too short. Basically if you don't mash the button when it appears you'll lose. If you lose you'll generally lose a lot of health. Given that predators attack such that you cannot get away, if you lose twice you might as well reload. There are also way too many of them (although that isn't a bug).
    5) In combat you cannot get out because when you switch out of combat mode you'll likely get hit which puts you back into combat mode.
    6) In some cases if you're in combat mode but run away it thinks you're still in combat (even after minutes) and won't allow you to do certain things like air assassinate animals.
    7) On a couple of occasions an assassination target was partially clipped into the scenery making them impossible to assassinate.
    8) Bears and cougars go into an infinite escape loop if a gun goes off. Once I watch a group of bears run in circles for 5 minutes after a gun went off. They ignore everything and everyone. Another time a cougar did the same thing near a guard and the guard just kept walking by them as though they didn't exist.    … Expand
  72. trollkiller
    Feb 26, 2013
    5
    One of the most frustrating games I've played. When it works it is brilliant and exhilarating; far too often, though, it feels simply like work. A chore. This is largely due to the fact that most side missions serve no purpose other than time filler (sea missions being the exception and the true high point of the game), and to the variable glitchy, twitchy controls--seems that at keyOne of the most frustrating games I've played. When it works it is brilliant and exhilarating; far too often, though, it feels simply like work. A chore. This is largely due to the fact that most side missions serve no purpose other than time filler (sea missions being the exception and the true high point of the game), and to the variable glitchy, twitchy controls--seems that at key moments the designers decided to slightly alter the control command for no apparent reason, and you end up failing full synchronization. Or in a final boss battle when suddenly you have to learn an entirely new control command scheme to succeed. At any rate, when i finished this game it was with no sense of joy or accomplishment-- just a grim determination to finish something I started. In other words, work.… Expand
  73. Nichtswisser
    Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Another year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leavesAnother year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leaves you with a feeling of accomplishment, finishing something that was boringly easy one the other hand just leaves you bored. And a game isn't supposed to bore you, causing boredom is pretty much the opposite of what a game should do.

    Or maybe you are one of those people who enjoy to cheat in multiplayer games, or usually run through single player titles in god-mode, because in that case this might be a game for you. For those who require a little challenge in order not to grow bored with a game, better look elsewhere.    … Expand
  74. fitscotgaymer
    Jun 7, 2013
    5
    I scored this game a 5. And I think I am being a little generous in doing so.

    The reason I believe that is because this game seemed to have looked at the prior AC games and everything they did (all the improvements made and all the feedback given) and then promptly ignored it all. The game starts you off as probably the most interesting and fun AC character ever, Haytham Kenway, and    I scored this game a 5. And I think I am being a little generous in doing so.

    The reason I believe that is because this game seemed to have looked at the prior AC games and everything they did (all the improvements made and all the feedback given) and then promptly ignored it all.

    The game starts you off as probably the most interesting and fun AC character ever, Haytham Kenway, and then at the end of that section of the game hits you with the two by four in the face revelation that shock! Haytham was a templar all along! *facepalm*
    The delivery and telegraphing of that particular fact was seen a mile off, and when it finally game out it was done in such a hamfisted way that I physically rolled my eyes.

    You are then shifted onto the Connor sections of the game. And from there the whole thing just rolls downhill until its inevitable car crash at the end.
    Connor's youth VA is stilted, and incredibly fake sounding; and the impetus for his revenge was delivered in as pointless and hamfisted a manner as the Haytham-is-a-templar "revelation" it was eye rollingly bad. And he gets no better as an adult. His adult VA isn't as poor but honestly that is no saving grace as the adult "Connor" is the single dullest most annoying character I have ever seen (and I have sufferred through Adoring Fan in Oblivion).

    When Connor isn't being dull, he is being a pointless douchenozzle. And his miraculous involvement in every single major historical event surrounding the independence war period defies belief. It gets to the point of immersion shatteringly bad.
    And then Connor's arc ends, not with having to fight your father Haytham (who was the Grand Master of the Americas Templar Order) but fight "General Lee" his second in command... Which doesn't make sense considering the impetus for the game is to stop his father and the Templars.

    The game does do a better job of communicating the type of person that Desmond is. It shows him as rather brave and heroic and he comes off as pretty likeable. And the Desmond sections of the game don't feel as irritating or annoying in this game as they did in prior games; but I am unsure if that is a function of Connor being so dull that even Desmond looks better in comparison I don't know...
    And then we have that pointless car crash of an ending. I mean honestly what was it with 2012 games ending with 3 all having horribly stupid endings? Dear god.

    Moving onto gameplay. None of the improvements that Brotherhood and Revelations made to the gameplay seem to have made it into this game. In fact it seems to have gottten worst because the devs seem to be trying to portray Connor along the lines of the Wizard archetype (with all his techie stuff) and over complicated the whole thing and implemented it all incredibly poorly.
    There is literally no point to going onto roofs at all in this game. And combat is a frustrating and irritating slog. The guards seem to be psychic; and the controls seem to be back to being twitchy and overly sensitive as they were in AC1.

    The only part of this game I loved (and it seems to be universally loved) is the naval sections of this game. I bet I am not the only person in the world who said "I want a pirate game with these naval mechanics!"
    Evidentally I wasn't because we now have AC4: The Black Flag due out (less than 18 months after AC3 is not a good sign though) which centres the entire game around that mechanic.

    This game... Buy it because you want the complete collection. But honestly it isn't worth suffering through.    … Expand
  75. ShouldbeStudyin
    Nov 3, 2012
    5
    Let's get this out of the way first thing. How does this game stack up to it's predecessors? It's worse than every other Assassin's Creed except Revelations. Here's the details. The game starts off with a 5-7 hour tutorial. It will range from mildly interesting to mind-numbingly boring. When the game proper finally starts you get turned loose in the world. The world of Assassin's Creed 3Let's get this out of the way first thing. How does this game stack up to it's predecessors? It's worse than every other Assassin's Creed except Revelations. Here's the details. The game starts off with a 5-7 hour tutorial. It will range from mildly interesting to mind-numbingly boring. When the game proper finally starts you get turned loose in the world. The world of Assassin's Creed 3 is probably the least detailed of all AC worlds. The cities have very few buildings worth climbing, and tend to look pretty much the same (i.e. the cities have no separate identity). The frontier suffers from Skyrim Syndrome. It's big, but it has nothing in it. Hunting is a waste of time and adds nothing to the game. The end of the game is a huge letdown. Climbing has been streamlined to the point where just pushing up will get you to the top of anything. There are no really cool secret locations to explore. Objective markers will hold your hand in the most annoying way. It's not all bad though, Ship combat is fantastic, and if this game had been Pirates Creed, we'd have an obvious GOTY. Your interactions with your manor are much improved and more personal. The Desmond sequences are very well done and probably the highlights of the game. The villain is actually a pretty interesting character. Combat has been given some tiny improvements which make the combat feel a little better, but it remains extremely easy. The story is typical AC stuff. Really AC3 comes of as a forgettable game. It's not bad, or great. It's a good game which no one is going to look back on and think "That game was awesome." It's one truly fantastic part is the ship battles.Some people describe it as a flawed gem. It's no gem. It's a copper penny. And you won't even remember it in a year. This all being said, it's worth playing to see the story's end. I wouldn't buy it full price though. Rating 7.3/10… Expand
  76. DarkDjango
    Nov 8, 2012
    5
    A once fresh and promising franchise has been reduced to a slog through frustrating gameplay, odd design choices, and bad dialogue in this latest game in the Assassin
  77. UsagiYojimbo
    Feb 9, 2013
    5
    After huge disapointment AC3 was for me, I've started to read user reviews. All the professional gaming media were so hyped and enchanted by amount of game content that they forgot that all that matters is gameplay. AC is full of great animation, cinematic and collectibles but 70% of the game is walking from cutscene to cutscene and pressing x!! Third installment in the series could haveAfter huge disapointment AC3 was for me, I've started to read user reviews. All the professional gaming media were so hyped and enchanted by amount of game content that they forgot that all that matters is gameplay. AC is full of great animation, cinematic and collectibles but 70% of the game is walking from cutscene to cutscene and pressing x!! Third installment in the series could have been a revolution but it took a huge step backward and lost most of it's unique identity. Assassinations? You have to wait over 6 hours for first. Free running? Useless, because of the limited architecture and long gaps between buildings. Open world and it's distractors? Present but the game doesn't encourage you to leave main path.

    Overall, this game is average despite impressive list of features and content.    … Expand
  78. Briancl25
    Nov 11, 2012
    5
    Running around the frontier and hunting is pretty fun as is fighting massive amounts of enemies at one time. The graphics are incredible. The story itself is quite boring, and after a while I found myself not even caring. All the collectibles are more rewarding to find than in any of the other past games. One bad thing is the tomahawk you start with is extremely powerful, so there reallyRunning around the frontier and hunting is pretty fun as is fighting massive amounts of enemies at one time. The graphics are incredible. The story itself is quite boring, and after a while I found myself not even caring. All the collectibles are more rewarding to find than in any of the other past games. One bad thing is the tomahawk you start with is extremely powerful, so there really is no need to upgrade your weapons at all like the past games. I always enjoy the Assassin's creed games regardless because I enjoy just running around and climbing. This is probably the second to worst in the series, right ahead of Brotherhood. If you are a fan of the series, just ignore the nay-sayers and get it, but don't expect too much or you will be let down.… Expand
  79. Davidlmw
    Nov 3, 2012
    5
    I have been an Assassin's Creed follower since its initial release and my expectations of this release had great anticipation given what I believed was a dismal Assassin's Creed Revelations because of the failure to follow up on character storylines in its release and what I felt was a very poor story; and falling for the marketing hype for this new release.

    Assassin's Creed 3 did allow    I have been an Assassin's Creed follower since its initial release and my expectations of this release had great anticipation given what I believed was a dismal Assassin's Creed Revelations because of the failure to follow up on character storylines in its release and what I felt was a very poor story; and falling for the marketing hype for this new release.

    Assassin's Creed 3 did allow the completion of those storylines especially with Lucy, Subject 16 and Daniel as well as Desmond's Father and Minerva and Juno. What is the most troublng to me is Ubisoft's continued persistence in not allowing the gamer to replay the memories at the end of the game. This alone is very frustrating and leaves a very sour taste. This has been the case throughout the series and I was hoping that Ubisoft would change that this time around. I feel the creators and project managers do not get it when it comes to this sort of gameplay. The complete lack of opportunity in this area rates a "0".

    The storyline was good in Assassin"s Creeed 3 but the gameplay, controls, cutscenes, fast travel, lockpicking and character development were abismal and the storyline just dragged. The opportunity to create a community in and around the Homestead was terrible and in the end when you went to the ledger your profits were not worth the time and energy to get the community up and running.

    The ending was in my opinion another slow motion fiasco and again took control out of the gamers hands.

    While understandably this is a work of fiction, it was a far stretch, especially Connor's mentor. This development was poor at best.

    Your ability to complete missions at 100% sync was next to impossible and your ability to remain undected at times was a joke. In the end I feel that Ubisoft needs to re-think how they allow the gamer not only to play but to finish a game as well as allow them the opportunity to go back and replay missions as well as the opportunity to play animus missions again as well as the ending. As a gamer this is again so very frustrating when you have invested so much time not only in the main missions; but the plethera of what I feel are way to many side missions, liberations of cities and getting Assassin's for the order.

    Perhaps there are far to many hands in the development "cookie jar". It would also be of great benefit to have Ubisoft develop gameplay difficulty settings. The average or recreational gamer would struggle with this game, especially the Pitcairn mission, the Charles Lee chase, the Prison Missions, especially the brawl he has to create and finish. The controls are not set up to allow the average gamer to succeed, unlike previous games.

    I sincerely hope that someone from Ubisoft reads these constructive comments and acts upon them. Up to now it does not seem that way.

    While the newness and enivironments were at times a welcome change, I do not feel Connor fit the character of the "ASSASSIN" that Ubisoft had developed. The voice acting was marginal in this game with the exception of Connor's Father. The dialogue scenes were terrible as mouths did not even move many times.

    Finally I feel Connor's home base in the basement deserved much more attention. It was a huge letdown from the previous games as were the rewards and the advancement of weapons in the game.

    I feel Assassin's Creed Brotherhood is the "mold" they should go back to and "Please, Please" allow us to replay the endings and the animus scenes, dialogue's and missions and not have to start and replay a whole new game to do this.

    Put the next release into the hands of those who developed and produced "Brotherhood" and someone with some knowledge and wisdom to figure out how we can replay the endings and loose the slow motion and inability to just use the "Apple" at the end of the game.    … Expand
  80. BioHazardPark
    Oct 31, 2012
    5
    Alright I have to be harsh here, as I wanted to enjoy this game but so far it has been boring me. Will it get better after 15 hours? Maybe, but so far it has been boring. Controlling your character feels like controlling a drunk bicycle, many times when I wanted to approach a door to open it I would climb it instead. The shadows looks really bad, what is this dotted mess supposed to be?Alright I have to be harsh here, as I wanted to enjoy this game but so far it has been boring me. Will it get better after 15 hours? Maybe, but so far it has been boring. Controlling your character feels like controlling a drunk bicycle, many times when I wanted to approach a door to open it I would climb it instead. The shadows looks really bad, what is this dotted mess supposed to be? Yes it does look better then the previous games but it… Expand
  81. KrazB3
    Nov 3, 2012
    5
    I think this game seriously suffered from the hype. Amazing new graphics! Biggest map ever! Hunting! Look at all the cool things we can do! The developers lost their way. The little details are great, but the overall pieces just aren't. Best examples: combat is difficult, harder than any AC game before it. It takes forever to get anywhere, because the frontier is huge and the cities areI think this game seriously suffered from the hype. Amazing new graphics! Biggest map ever! Hunting! Look at all the cool things we can do! The developers lost their way. The little details are great, but the overall pieces just aren't. Best examples: combat is difficult, harder than any AC game before it. It takes forever to get anywhere, because the frontier is huge and the cities are full of guards who seem to be much smarter than they were in previous games. And while I love US history and the story so far, it doesn't make up for the fact that this is a frustrating game to play, just because of how the game is set up to work. I'm sad really. Everyone was expecting a masterpiece, and what we got was a decent game at best. There are some fun parts. But ultimately, if I was new to the series, I wouldn't be coming back.… Expand
  82. Antiks
    Nov 5, 2012
    5
    They succeeded in making the same game again. It's prettier now but it's essentially the same as the previous two with an even more boring combat system (the old one was already a zero threat snooze fest). Lots of glitches and bugs in this one as well. I've always found these AC games somewhat boring and easy but this one was much worse in respect to combat. I'm surprised there are so manyThey succeeded in making the same game again. It's prettier now but it's essentially the same as the previous two with an even more boring combat system (the old one was already a zero threat snooze fest). Lots of glitches and bugs in this one as well. I've always found these AC games somewhat boring and easy but this one was much worse in respect to combat. I'm surprised there are so many positive reviews it makes me wonder how many employees have metacritic accounts.… Expand
  83. mrtrollface
    Nov 5, 2012
    5
    My oh my I expected this to be the 2nd greatest AC game to date. The reason why I didn't expect this to be the best is that I used to always get my hopes up about everything, and it ended with me being extremely dissapointed. Ok so I'll get to the point. The new AnvilNext engine is a love hate thing, leaning towards the hate side. The good: Lots of new animations, naval battles weather,My oh my I expected this to be the 2nd greatest AC game to date. The reason why I didn't expect this to be the best is that I used to always get my hopes up about everything, and it ended with me being extremely dissapointed. Ok so I'll get to the point. The new AnvilNext engine is a love hate thing, leaning towards the hate side. The good: Lots of new animations, naval battles weather, tree climbing, better water, seasons, lots of explorability, a little bit better multiplayer, and most importantly, new graphics, which were just a tad better than Revelations'. The bad: The combat wheel/interface is a bit trickier to use, parkour system is 3.5x more derp than Brotherhood's, the stealth is TERRIBLE (you could walk up to a group of guards, stab somebody not in view of the rest, and then out of nowhere the will attack you claiming they "saw what you did".), many, many, many, many glitches and bugs, almanac pages are soooooo hard to get, even the ones that seem simple to get, cutscenes are boring, sequences 1-5 are very boring (I fell asleep for a couples of minutes while one was still going on), combat mechanics are so very hard to get the hang of, musket shots are like modern sniper rifles, officers have very bad aim and often shoot their own squad (but I really won't complain too much though), grenadiers are really hard to kill, officers are very hard to kill, Conner's arm glitches through Ezio's Brotherhood cape in his outfit, rope darts are very derp and hard to use, guards are really dumb, the crowds are very dumb, I can't seem to find the power source places to put the things in during the modern time, is game is a bit too racist (I'm part Cherokee N.A. myself), the naval ship is a little off center when shooting broadside cannon shots, the naval ship is a little hard to control, a lot of unnecessary equipment that I highly doubt anybody would use, horse mechanics are worse than ACII's, my horse will randomly get shot down, I don't understand why Conner had to wait soooo many sequences to kill Charles Lee, Conner was way too mean to Achilles, not able to keep a musket in place of the bow, certain walking movements made you seem like you were drunk, air assassinations don't always work, viewpoints were dissapointingly low in altitude, items in the general store were expensive, and money was hard to come by, lockpicking was very hard, the Frontier was too big and confusing to navigate, I can't seem to equip more than 1 pistol, as I see I have holseters for 2, no ability to use a sword or weapons besides a ranged one on horseback, naval missions were a tad bit too hard, I never had any idea how much was needed to go up 1 notoriety level, the battlefield mission of bunker/breed's hill was harder than trying to melee only your way through a Halo 2 legendary mission, raging at this game was very easy, if you can't kill children in the game, then you shouldn't be able to kill domestic animals, Desmond's missions were too short, and THE ABSOLUTE WORST THING ABOUT THIS GAME IS THAT YOU HAVE TO DO 3 VERY HARD/RAGE INDUCING THINGS TO GET THAT 100% FULL SYNCHRONIZATION!!!!!!! So if you are considering getting this game, don't, please, you'll hate yourself if you do, save your money for Halo when it comes out. Thank you for reading and have a nice day.… Expand
  84. LAB200
    Jan 18, 2013
    5
    This game had the mechanic to be the best Assassin's Creed ever, but it was the worse in my opinion (considering the release date). Don't understand me bad, I'm a great fan of franchise, I buy it every year and if release a new I will buy it again, but this game gave me a attack of rage that I want give a score of 0 to it.

    And why am I so disappointed? The main campaign is excellent,    This game had the mechanic to be the best Assassin's Creed ever, but it was the worse in my opinion (considering the release date). Don't understand me bad, I'm a great fan of franchise, I buy it every year and if release a new I will buy it again, but this game gave me a attack of rage that I want give a score of 0 to it.

    And why am I so disappointed? The main campaign is excellent, full of reverses, it really surprises you. Connor is an amazing character, he is pretty different from Altair and Ezio which gives him a own mark. The great defect of the game are the most weak side missions of ever AC. In AC2, Brotherhood and Revelations we have made missions of ASSASSINS what includes espionage, steal and the most important: assassination. But in AC3 this missions are very rare, there are a lot of farm's missions (for children) that the own Connor says in one of them: "The things I make for this place."
    There are some good missions in the city to recruit new assassins to the order, but they are just acceptable.

    There would be no problem in add farm's missions (just to remember: they are for children) to Connor's adventure, but without remove what I learned to love in previous experiences.

    And there is more: AC is a game that permits you be free, you can kill the target any way you want, in stealth way or like a barbarian entering in a scandalous fight, but in 3rd edition you is obliged to do a second option, very rare the moments you can make all sneaking (just in forts and missions of main campaign)

    This should be an action-adventure game with STEALTH ELEMENTS, but they removed almost all the stealth.

    Because this, it was a major deception I have had when the matter is videogame, I hope it change in 2013.    … Expand
  85. patroche08
    Nov 17, 2012
    5
    I first of all have to say that I had really high hopes for this game. The first AC did not really strike my interest but it did intrigue me enough to give ACII a try and I was blown away. Then ACII:B came out and I was hooked. The combat was fun, the stories were awesome and Ezio was a fantastic protagonist. Then when Revelations stumbled a bit I thought it was just a bump in the road.I first of all have to say that I had really high hopes for this game. The first AC did not really strike my interest but it did intrigue me enough to give ACII a try and I was blown away. Then ACII:B came out and I was hooked. The combat was fun, the stories were awesome and Ezio was a fantastic protagonist. Then when Revelations stumbled a bit I thought it was just a bump in the road. Boy was I wrong. ACIII comes out of the gate limping. The graphics might be beautiful but they are only skin deep as pop ins and texture tearing is rampant.

    Then there are the glitches...Oh the numerous, numerous glitches. From getting stuck in a pile of hay to watching a guard fly into the stratosphere the glitches are everywhere and range from funny, a woman spawning into the back of a cart and being dragged along, to game breaking, finding Connor frozen in place while his target gleefully runs away. The glitches could be forgiven if it wasn't for the fact that these two examples appeared AFTER the day one patch. That's right, after Ubisoft claimed they were fixing the numerous issues I got the pleasure of having the game break several times.

    The there is the story and characters. The AC franchise has been a series that has done a tremendous job of transporting gamers to unique locations, and while this one is no exception, the Colonies in 1775 are beautiful and full of life, the story and characters come off lacking. Connor is in no way shape or form a replacement for the charismatic and dangerous Ezio. Where as Ezio was charming and roguish and likable, Connor is quiet, easily angered and all around just bland. He continually asks characters, "what would you have me do," a number of times while having paper thin motivations. I find it troubling when the side characters in a game highlight just how bland and boring our main character is. I found myself wanting to play as Samuel Adams, at least he has a range in his vocalizations and has clear motivations.

    This seems to be ACIII's problem, it looks the part and is trying to convince you that it is the next step in the franchise but its motivations are all over the place. The combat is fun, if a bit too familiar (Arkham City) and the ship battles are fantastic. But for every step forward the game takes two, even three steps back. Why is it that I am doing eavesdropping missions when they were one of the worst gameplay aspects of the FIRST AC?! Also why is it that AC:B and Revelations gave me more options to complete missions where as ACIII punishes you for not completing a mission precisely how the developers planned it? For freedom it seems a bit constrained.

    Which brings me to the 100% sync. Introduced in Brotherhood, this was a clever way to challenge players. In Brotherhood and Revelations it was just that, a challenge. In ACIII 100% sync becomes a tedious almost torturous chore and goes to highlight the broken gameplay mechanics and a number of irritating glitches. If I am supposed to kill my target without anyone noticing don't make it so my hidden blades alert every damn guard in Boston! It goes to frustrating even further when you realize that you cannot complete epilogue missions without getting 100% sync, which means that as a fan of the franchise, if you want to see the real 100% ending of the game you have to do the OPTIONAL side objectives. Ubisoft, don't make something optional and then purposely withhold content from the ending of the game. The 100% sync options come off as cheap and lazy, as though the developers added them in at random to flesh out bare boned missions. I really wanted to love this game, so much so that I thought I could hail it as a huge leap for the franchise, much as ACII was from AC. But that was not to be. Instead I came away from ACIII feeling as though three years of development and anticipation evaporated into a cloud of mediocrity. ACIII is in no way a revolution, it is more a slight step forward with a bum leg and an eye patch. Here is hoping we don't have to see two more games of Connor before we truly get the next huge step for the franchise.    … Expand
  86. Aibanez
    Nov 22, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. ...Continues from previous comment:

    What I didn't like:
    - The LAG: It is the first thing you notice when you start playing the game, do not lie to yourselves guys, this games lags, and it does it horribly. How can this happen in 2012? When you get to Boston or New york the game is almost unplayable, all immersive feeling towards the game you might have achieved absolutely breaks up when you see that painfull, unforgivable lag.
    -The glitches:Unforgivable Ubisoft... glitches in this game are a bad joke.
    - The fight system: somethings are better, the blood is great, but i HATE the camera; character seems so far away when you're fighting and you wish you cold just look closer. Besides, you get a feeling of "Arkham city" with this new fighting system, one button magically blocks the attack, and then you can counter. If that was the intention, let me tell you that Assassin's Creed never needed to copy or imitate another game's fighting system... well, that's how I felt when playing it.
    - Too much running: The missions were like: Frontier to Boston, Boston to frontier, frontier to New york, New york to frontier, Frontier to homestead, homestead to frontier, frontier to boston, and so ON, it was like they were forcing you to go through the world over and over for you to see how wonderful it was, or using fast travel everytime, but there's no fun in that either...
    - Besides the incredibly BIG setting, you feel limited at times. I wish I could haev thrown the tomahawk, wish you could choose between leaving the hood on or off with a button, felt limited when switching weapons cause it took too much time for example to pick the horse to be able to whistle and call it. Thought the round weapon invetory system of previous games was easier to use.
    - Too many cutscenes (spoiler): If you have beaten the game, you know that you don't kill the bad guy, you watch Connor kill the bad guy in a cutscene... what's up with that?? - Atmosphere: You never feel quite as "inside the game's world" as with previous assassin's creed games where setting and music and graphics combined perfectly while pulling you into the middle of this incredible world.
    - Short story: From Brotherhood on i have always felt these games are way too short. Being able to explore and hunt for hours or have a lot of fun in multiplayer shouldn't compensate for a short story.
    - Desmond: since revelations he is getting uglier. Looks like a completely different person.
    -Horses: It has always bugged me that you can't go faster when horsebackriding inside a city or town, it is ridiculous. Same with not being able to run inside some taverns, it is way too frustrating to have to walk slow because the game wants you to.

    What i liked about AC3:

    -New running system: Feels more real to run with connor, and it is great to jump between trees.
    -The frontier/Homestead: running through the open field is a charm, you fell free, in contact with nature, away from the noise of the cities and the guards chasing you. It's where I usually hang out when i've had a stressful day.
    -Naval Warfare: In one word: AWESOME.
    -Animals, children: Everything feels much more alive and real when you put animals and children in it. Previously we got to see only adults and horses...
    - Seasons: the depth of snow is great among other cool things about having seasons. And also the rain and thunder is a really good addition to the series.
    - Character development: I agree game starts painfully slow, but it is cool to see how Connor grows up and becomes an Assassin. Although you feel like it is a proggressive development, in the end you feel like you become an Assassin way too fast when you're told "Ok, you can wear the suit now".
    -Peaking through corners: great! only thing left is being able to crouch and move more stealthy.
    -Everything about the landscapes, cities, forests, trees, grass, houses, fences, sky, water... too bad it lags like hell.
    -Locking system: well it's not a great improvement but i like to run sometimes with the close camera, gives it another 3rd person perspective.
    -Blending: great job with this, it's so much simpler to blend almost anywhere.

    There might be other things I'm forgetting right now, but as for now I hope the patch Ubisoft is offering fixes all that it says it will, and I also hope it helps a little with the excessive lag, which is what bothers me the most about this game.

    Thank you for reading, waiting for AC4 now.    … Expand
  87. Jasoneid
    Dec 2, 2012
    5
    AC III it's a bad story, a bad character and many bugs, many many bugs. Is this a Beta ? This game is a shame for every fan. The end of the Desmond story arc is just confused. Lame. Boring. But with superb graphics... well... not enough to make a good game.
  88. oceantorment
    Dec 13, 2012
    5
    I really don't recommend buying this game full price, maybe buying cheaper, but for $ 60,00, it isn't worth this price. The game is unfinished, they wasted too much time on the engine and graphics, so there wasn't money and time left for adding, you know? Gameplay. The missions are linear, scripted, short, and unchallenging, even Assassins creed I is better than this game and I hatedI really don't recommend buying this game full price, maybe buying cheaper, but for $ 60,00, it isn't worth this price. The game is unfinished, they wasted too much time on the engine and graphics, so there wasn't money and time left for adding, you know? Gameplay. The missions are linear, scripted, short, and unchallenging, even Assassins creed I is better than this game and I hated Assassins Creed I. The side activities are pointless, I got bored very quickly when I discovered that most side missions required of me to watch two or more loading screens, walk half the map to just beat a random dude or to do a simple fetch quest to some generic NPC. The game is just a big interactive movie, the story is decent, but is no way as good as assssin's creed II . I really don't understand, why Ubisoft want to turn all their games into interactive movies. Do you like interactive movies? Buy Walking dead instead (the story is way better and its cheaper too). Do you like open world games? Better games for you: Skyrim, Fallout New Vegas, Read Dead Redemption. Do you really want to buy an assassins creed game? Buy assassins creed II (it's still a game an not an interactive movie, will not bore you to death with endless cutscenes, the story is way better). Really want to buy this game? Better buy used or wait for the price to drop. If you buy this game for $ 60,00, you are just wasting your money and if this game sales are good, I fear for the future of the franchise.… Expand
  89. Alex101
    Jan 10, 2013
    5
    Assassin's Creed III is a very predictable game, the graphics are really great that
  90. Arlekins
    Feb 16, 2013
    5
    Many had high expectations for this game. All of that slowly withered away for me after playing as the father of the main character for about 2hrs. Then, when we finally get a taste of Connor, we are basically doing more training missions after we just played for a decent amount of time. The story was still AC esque, this means I didn't enjoy it. Stupid twists and pointless missionsMany had high expectations for this game. All of that slowly withered away for me after playing as the father of the main character for about 2hrs. Then, when we finally get a taste of Connor, we are basically doing more training missions after we just played for a decent amount of time. The story was still AC esque, this means I didn't enjoy it. Stupid twists and pointless missions weren't all too pleasing. Also, the way they advertised the "big war-like battles" was pointless, as we played through about 3 of them, which weren't even long. Although it was overall displeasing I did enjoy how it added new types of missions, enemies and ways of ASSASINATING people. In the end though the new fighting style really pissed me off as it was totally different then the previous 4 games, also the recruits made no sense to me as well as the homestead, I never used them. Finally, I won't say it, but the ending was horrible… Expand
  91. lox
    Mar 1, 2013
    5
    One word: disappointing. Assassin's Creed 3 had so much hype surrounding it, me being one of the millions who gave into it. It looked so promising and judging from the trailers it looked like it had the potential to be the best AC game yet, as well as GOTY. But the game has too many flaws in my opinion. Playing as Haytham Kenway was fun for a little while but then for me it got tiresomeOne word: disappointing. Assassin's Creed 3 had so much hype surrounding it, me being one of the millions who gave into it. It looked so promising and judging from the trailers it looked like it had the potential to be the best AC game yet, as well as GOTY. But the game has too many flaws in my opinion. Playing as Haytham Kenway was fun for a little while but then for me it got tiresome and I just couldn't wait to finally play as Connor, whom you don't get to play as until several hours into the game. And even when you do finally play as Connor, you realize after a while that his personality is dull as a wooden plank. The combat system in AC3 when compared to previous AC'S is new and innovative, but it eventually gets repetitive rather quickly. Fighting guards eventually turns into a chore rather than a challenge. Also, the game had almost no climax to it. There was almost nothing at all that was relatively exciting enough to get me hooked to the story or the characters. I felt like the naval missions were utterly unnecessary. And to top things off, the ending of the game was unsatisfactory and a little disappointing. The only pros I can say this game has going for it is its voice acting, graphics, and soundtrack. It has memorable music, great voice actors, and is visually impressive(e.g. the wilderness). Overall, this game did not live up to its hype and certainly didn't exceed my expectations. AC3 was over-hyped and under-delivered.… Expand
  92. Auritone
    Mar 20, 2016
    5
    After the mediocre experience that was Assassin’s Creed Revelation I was not exactly looking forward to Assassin’s Creed 3, and now that I finally got around to play it, I again wish I had not.
    Like Revelation this game is filled to the brim with menial and inconsequential tasks that quickly becomes very, very dull. Like the hopelessly superficial hunting system.
    What is the actual point    After the mediocre experience that was Assassin’s Creed Revelation I was not exactly looking forward to Assassin’s Creed 3, and now that I finally got around to play it, I again wish I had not.
    Like Revelation this game is filled to the brim with menial and inconsequential tasks that quickly becomes very, very dull. Like the hopelessly superficial hunting system.
    What is the actual point of this?
    Well, you can choose to sell the various pelts and teeth you gain, or use them to craft various things you can then sell in trade caravans you can establish to the main cities.
    Oh goodie, more administration, because it worked so well in Revelation… and it is just as useless as an underwater football pitch. I established one caravan, realized it mattered little, and promptly decided to completely ignore this aspect of the game with absolutely no consequences.
    But hunting and trade administration are not the only vacuous aspects in this study of endless menial tasks.
    You can take over various fortresses as well, which could be interesting if you actually had to sneak in there, but since the combat is so mind-bogglingly easy, I found that just running in there and killing everyone was the most effective and least time-consuming way of doing it.
    And your reward for this? A reduction in trade taxes… I am not even joking.
    Then there are the ever present hunting of random chests, elusive pages of a books, killing of randomly appearing Templars, delivering letters, killing sick dogs, carrying sick people from a to b, protecting farmers, and opening up quick-travel points by traversing the labyrinth underbelly of the city, in what can best be described as playing Pac-Man with no ghosts or dots. Yes, you just walk around in largely empty corridors, lighting torches, and encountering the occasional puzzle – and I do mean occasional.
    But what about the naval battles? Those are fun, right?
    Well, to begin with, but that is mostly because it’s the ONLY variation this game has to offer that didn’t bore the snot out of me – that is until I realized how incredibly easy it was. But it still is the most fun part of this game, but like everything else these battles are largely just a series of inconsequential side-missions.
    Then there is the assassination aspect of the game… I mean, the game is called Assassin’s Creed after all.
    I went about 10 hours into the game before I got to assassinate anyone of consequence, and before that happened, I had been tasked with so many pointless and boring things to do, that I frankly had stopped caring even remotely about the story or the people in it. When I finally got to the end of the game I was so utterly indifferent to everything and everyone I was just happy it was all over.
    Which brings me to the story and the characters. I will dare anyone to find a more vacuous, boring, and utterly uninteresting character than Connor. He makes Twilight’s Bella Swan and Watchdog’s Aiden seem multifaceted and interesting, bubbling over with emotional outbursts. Add to that the horrible pacing (starting with a 4 hour prologue), which seems to deliberately pull you out of the narrative, while at the same time doing its best to give The Matrix a run for its money in utter pretentiousness, coupled with some of the stupidest characters and planning ever (like Desmond infiltrating places, where people from Aspergo is already looking for him, by simply walking through the front door with his hood pulled over his head), and you’ve got a story that really feels like the rest of the game – mediocre and forgettable.
    Lastly, there is the whole control scheme, which at this point is getting tiring. It was novel in the first games, but now it becomes more and more clear that this kind of environmental sensitive controls, where the character does everything according to what is in front of him, is wrestling control away from the player who is now only in control of steering. No jumping, no rolling, no nothing. It may look cool, but when you realize that you did not do any of this yourself, the game did, it becomes tiresome and outright boring. This is what the phrase “player empowerment” has been reduced to – “Push a button, awesome happens!” – something we saw in 1983 with Dragon’s Lair, so in 29 years we really have not evolved that much, have we?
    No, Assassin’s Creed 3 is NOT a step up from Revelation, but a sad continuation of beating the decomposing carcass of a long dead horse.
    This series (along with a lot of other “sandbox” games) may want to learn the phrase “size does not matter”, because who cares how long or big a game is when it obviously lacks content to warrant its length and size? In the case of Assassin’s Creed 3 a smaller and more focused game would have done a world of good in elevating it from the beautiful piece of mediocrity it actually is.    … Expand
  93. 5monkeez
    Mar 22, 2013
    5
    Such a heartbreaker! Been a fan of AC since the beginning and have loved the adventure/history blend. Am also a fan of the American Revolution. AC's gameplay has always been stellar... until now. The game is one big glitch. Don't know if I'll buy AC: IV. Yes, it has pirates but this player has been burned.
  94. ICEExMagic
    Apr 28, 2013
    5
    This game was a major disappointment.The begging of the game took forever to get to the fighting.Even though the combat is really fun,the game is so boring.
  95. Nortonator369
    Aug 23, 2014
    5
    I have made another user review that overdid the hatred a bit, this is to fix this, Assassins Creed 3 is an acceptable game It made steps in the series, some right and some wrong, Some of the right things is that is established it's own framework from which the game formed, it gave us new mechanics and gameplay. But Connor is such a bland character in relation to Haythem, I would ofI have made another user review that overdid the hatred a bit, this is to fix this, Assassins Creed 3 is an acceptable game It made steps in the series, some right and some wrong, Some of the right things is that is established it's own framework from which the game formed, it gave us new mechanics and gameplay. But Connor is such a bland character in relation to Haythem, I would of prefered to play the whole game as haythem. Also does this time period really appeal to anyone Outside the UK or America, you can't get an Australian like me to care about the things that those to carried on with, it just doesn't tick, the crusades and the renaissance as appealing to everyone, especially since the majority of us aren't in Italy, it helps boost the fanbase, and I shouldn't need to mention th time it takes to properly escape the linear boundries. In conclusion It's an OK game but it doesn't appeal to everyone.… Expand
  96. firekid250z
    Oct 22, 2013
    5
    I love the AC games and I feel like this isn't a terrible entry but I think they strayed to far from the stealth mechanics of the previous games. And it is way to easy to get out of impossible situations
  97. megamoonunit
    Dec 26, 2013
    5
    When I started playing this game, I was swept up in Assassin's Creed nostalgia. The gameplay was smooth but refined, and the world was massive. The combat flowed well and all in all the voice acting was very good. After a couple hours of gameplay, I noticed the first issue, the opening sequence is way too long. It took me three hours before I met the protagonist, and left me feeling likeWhen I started playing this game, I was swept up in Assassin's Creed nostalgia. The gameplay was smooth but refined, and the world was massive. The combat flowed well and all in all the voice acting was very good. After a couple hours of gameplay, I noticed the first issue, the opening sequence is way too long. It took me three hours before I met the protagonist, and left me feeling like most of what I had done to that point was just a glorified tutorial. I finally got to Connor's storyline and expected the game to finally pick up, there were a few issues with that though. First off, Connor is boring. He just floats through revolutionary America taking jobs for a bunch of founding fathers and barely has any traits. There may be a scene where he challenges his teacher, but as soon as that's over it's like it never happened. The use of founding fathers is enjoyable for a little, but I like American history, and when this game decides to say, "Paul Revere didn't do the midnight ride, it was Connor, Paul was just kind of there" it becomes annoying. It undermines the efforts of all these real people to promote the protagonist, and it didn't need to do that. Finally, there's the biggest problem with the game, it's boring. There are long stretches of game where you just follow people around and wander between Boston and New York (no Philadelphia?). And while that also happened in AC I and II (and all the other games), at least you were someplace interesting where you could have fun exploring the environment. 18th Century Boston isn't nearly as big or fun as Damascus or Rome, for god sake, if there was a building over 3 stories it was a treat, while in old ones you could climb hundreds of feet in the air. The action is fun, but there is a bit of issue with the technology of the time, namely, guns. In the revolutionary war, everyone owned a gun. Using swords and throwing knives is fun, until you get shot, then you just need to pick up a musket. I think this was a poor choice for setting, because the system worked in the other games. The player would meet some people they had heard of, some people they hadn't and run around getting into sword fights. Here, the player knows all the major characters (or at least I did) and realizes they made them so much less interesting than they were. A conversation with Thomas Jefferson about slavery should be riveting, but he just vaguely talks against it while Connor accuses him of being a hypocrite, then agrees to do some bland chore for him. Along the way, Connor gets shot and has to run around dodging redcoats until he can hide. It just doesn't work as well. Maybe Ubisoft is just spinning their wheels, but this feels more like an uninspired peripheral game than the climax of the franchise (or at least the trilogy). I give it a 5/10, if only because I did like the older games so much.… Expand
  98. HydrophobikFish
    Jun 9, 2023
    5
    Bland and forgettable sequel. It experimented with interesting things but few of them work. Settled locations lack verticality and new forest locations not enough to make up for it. Story is meandering and characters do not stand out. Intro bait and switch is very interesting but it goes on way too long, and the homestead has promise but isn't worth the rest of the game
  99. momther
    Nov 8, 2012
    4
    What a flimsy, glitchy POS this game is. A shame too, the artists brought their A game, and the people responsible for bugs and game control phoned it in (they probably worked hard, but on their end this game was not ready for ship). Hoping a patch will fix some issues though I doubt it. If you loved AC2, for me anyways this was a disappointment bordering on a stealing 60 dollars.
  100. Sydek93jm
    Dec 15, 2012
    4
    The idea is great. But in my opinion, a game with bugs cannot be considered a finished game. Also I have to complain to being forced to buy additional content if I'd like to play more missions, which of course, is pointless to me if I've already completed the game's main story.

    I was aiming very high on this one, because it's focused on my favourite era, but the results are not worthy    The idea is great. But in my opinion, a game with bugs cannot be considered a finished game. Also I have to complain to being forced to buy additional content if I'd like to play more missions, which of course, is pointless to me if I've already completed the game's main story.

    I was aiming very high on this one, because it's focused on my favourite era, but the results are not worthy of an enterprise like Ubisoft. The thing that impressed me more are the ending credits. I can't figure how so many people worked for this... This game is the pure capitalism's expression.    … Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

24
#24 Best Xbox 360 Game of 2012
5
#5 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2012
20
#20 Most Shared Xbox 360 Game of 2012

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
84

Generally favorable reviews - based on 61 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 61
  2. Mixed: 9 out of 61
  3. Negative: 0 out of 61
  1. GameCritics
    Dec 5, 2012
    60
    At least the petty indignities of the multiplayer are optional and situated around gameplay that's solid and unique, if frustratingly stagnant. In the single-player campaign, however, it's impossible to escape the ham-fisted manipulations of the Assassin's Creed III development team.
    Read full review
  2. Xbox World Australia
    Dec 2, 2012
    90
    Assassin's Creed III is a pretty damn fine game. It loses none of what makes the series fun with the translation to another time and continent, and creates a whole new set of experiences which define the franchise. The biggest issue, if there is one, are the small technical issues, but these niggling technical issues only seem worse because everything else is such a great experience.
    Read full review
  3. X-ONE Magazine UK
    Dec 1, 2012
    90
    Like any game of such scope, not every part of it is perfect. Yet, taken as a whole, there is very little that can compete with its wonderful, lavish, historical playground. [Issue#91, p.22]
See all critic reviews »