User Score
6.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1196 Ratings

User score distribution:

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
  1. Jan 6, 2013
    7
    When you open the Assassin's Creed III main menu for the first time, and you had played the whole series, wou will see an enormous difference, but when you open the single player history mode, you can see that Ubisoft made a real copy of all the others games. You can see innovations, of course, but you can't see a huge innovation. It's cool that Connor can climb trees, but it isn't that cool. Same thing when he takes two weapons at the same time, but the good work that you've made with a single hidden blade on the first Assassin's Creed is good enough. But one thing you'll miss is the character. Connor isn't a charismatic guy like Ezio or disciplined like Altaïr. He's so easy to forget that you won't even remember his name after finish that game. I'll say that Assassin's Creed III is one of the best games made by Ubisoft, but almost all of the fans of the Assassin's Creed series are disappointed after buy that game. Expand
  2. Jan 5, 2013
    3
    I'm about 15 or 20% through now. It plays like this - Walk 10 yards, cutscene, cutscene, walk 5 yards, cutscene cutscene cutscene etc. Then later you run a couple of hundred yards for more cutscene after cutscene. It's really gettig on my nerves.
  3. Jan 5, 2013
    5
    As an AC fan this one has turned out as a disappointment. Worst enemy AI hands down: Whether it's having an enemy go into full alert mode while I'm still down the road approaching from behind or having them give up chasing me the moment I run behind a tree 2 feet away, the enemy AI is terrible/buggy, and really hurts the immersion factor of the game. Story cuts all over the place:
    It's seems it was more important to the creators to stick Connor into every significant moment from 18th century American history and then cram them all into a game, rather than have a cohesive well developed story. The pace is terrible and motives or rationalisations of the characters are quite poor. Unfortunate that this was the conclusion to Desmond's story.

    Undeveloped game elements:
    First AC game where I couldn't stand completing all the side objectives. At certain points in the game you'll click into your map only to find it littered with confusing icons, that, if you had never played an AC game before, you'd have no idea what was going on. Having owned and played every AC game myself, I was still confused. The assassination side missions and delivery missions are so trivial and pointless, their only purpose seems to purpose is to get you to run across the map a couple of times. Less would have been so much more in this case. Why put all these side elements into the game at all if they're just going to be trivial and pointless - just leave them out!

    So many bugs...
    Want to weapon steal a sword in combat, only to find that you can't put it down and this ugly sword is attached to you for the rest of the game? Ever been surrounded by 5 enemies only to find your gun has randomly disappeared completely? Enjoy seeing dying enemies bizarrely squashed flat and then sucked into the vacuum of space? This game does that and so much more...

    Ultimately, this game is aesthetically looks great. The artistic design is spot on Connor's movement throughout the world is slick. Unfortunately everything else seems rushed, sloppy or underdeveloped and unpolished. It is these elements that are omnipresent with the game that ultimately kills what should have been the most innovative AC to date. Terribly Unfortunate.
    Expand
  4. Jan 4, 2013
    5
    Game is rather dull and the character is not as charismatic as Ezio. Most of the time you will spend on the ground since there are not many rooftops to run on. The tree climbing is pretty linear compared to buildings... This is probably the most boring AC game I played so far. I uninstalled the game half way and watched the crappy ending on Youtube.
  5. Jan 3, 2013
    6
    As a hardcore Assassin's Creed fan, this game was a huge disappointment compared to the others. The story-line in this game is alright, and the naval combat is quite good, however many things from the other Assassin's Creed games have been dumbed down, or completely taken out. This game almost felt completely different compared to the others.
  6. Jan 3, 2013
    1
    I am a fan of the assassin's creed series but I hated this one. First of all the new character has the personality of a cardboard box, unlike Ezio, Connor is overly serious all the time. Also the combat feels just like it did before, parry, counter, kill. I also found the story boring, the one sided American revolutionary plot is so biased it made me cringe. The first 4 hours give you freedom, the game never really recovers. The free running is bad, there are so many glitches. Assassin's creed 3 had so much potential but something went very wrong in making this game. Expand
  7. Jan 2, 2013
    5
    I really hope Ubisoft will take note of the feedback this game receives. It would be a big shame if they didn't do a better job on the next one, because this is one the best gaming franchises ever made and, even after almost putting my boot through the PC display plenty of times while cursing in ways I didn't know I could, I still enjoyed it and it's still Assassin's Creed.
    Unfortunately,
    it's a fine example of a hunt for profit by doing an "almost half-assed" job, to quote PC Gamer, by making some bad decisions like releasing it with a LOT of glitches and bugs (which prevent 100% completion!!!), having some totally cryptic and counter-intuitive mission design (as in: knowing what you need to do), and bloating it with extra features that are out of context and sometimes ruin the experience. But then, what else is new. It seems we're living in an age where the big companies are either happy with the initial money they make for some unfinished, crap quality products, or are putting stuff out there knowing that it's unfinished, because people will still buy it, and when the patches start rolling out to make the game what it should have been, people are all like "oh thank you!". And I'm not talking about the studios, we should know better than attacking them: it's a huge industry and it's full of sharks. But I digress.
    Here are my personal opinions:

    PROS: - the naval battles - the underground (although it's very uneventful, it still feels so cool) - the upgraded fighting mechanics
    CONS:
    - setting is boring
    - Connor is boring
    - optional objectives are often hard to read in all the commotion and I couldn't find a way to review them after the pop-up fades, besides restarting the checkpoint all over again
    - optional objectives vary from "accidentally did it" to "lost 2h retrying it 27 times and I want to die now"
    STUPID AND MORONIC (yes, I'm frustrated):
    - chasing those f***ing pages
    - losing control of the camera when enemy ships are spotted often made me crash into rocks/ships/whatever and restart the whole damn thing OR interrupted a shot just when I was about to fire
    Expand
  8. Jan 1, 2013
    5
    For me, this has been the most anticipated game since Vietcong 2 (which sadly, also bombed) back in 2005. Since the first Assassin's Creed, I have been a huge fan of this series, although (to be fair) slightly let down by Revelations, which in my opinion was way too short, and the first follow-up to let me down somewhat. With the Desmond saga building up to this undeniable climax, where "all will be revealed" and where patience will prove a virtue, making up for time lost from the Revelations story line... Assassin's Creed 3 plain and simply does not deliver.

    Don't get me wrong, it's a gorgeous game... but to be honest, what with all the advances in technology, I'd be slightly bummed if it didn't look better than it's predecessors. However, this doesn't just look better, it's gorgeous. If I didn't know it before, however, I do know it now... no amount of gorgeous graphics can make up for a shell of a game, for that essentially is what this feels like. With Altaïr and Ezio, we were trained to learn how to fight; with Connor, we are informed (through cut scene cinematics) that we have trained; fighting is no less easy prior to training, and where taking on 30 men at once in any of the previous games could be construed as perhaps having a bit of a death wish, in AC3 this is no problem what so ever (even without weapons, and prior to "training"). Fighting has become so easy that there now is little to no incentive (unless the main mission design demands it) to try a stealthy approach.

    When starting the game, you are informed that the Animus software has been upgraded; less jumping "the wrong way at the wrong time", in short just better control. This is either a blatant lie, or proof that Ubisoft never hired gameplay testers for this project. Never touch the jump button, and you'll be fine; touch it, and... well, it's at your own risk. Getting hurt isn't that big of a deal though, because no matter how hurt you get from falling (or fighting), as long as you aren't dead, your health quickly (and yes, we're talking really fast) regenerates to full. Being able to run off the ground, up in the trees is at times really cool. It is, however, at times equally frustrating to find that that one branch that looks like you should be able to stand on it (because you just a second ago stood on an identical one), doesn't think you should be able to stand on it. This is particularly evident in cities, where sometimes you jump into the tree, sometimes you jump through it.

    It's hard to figure out just what peeves me the most about this game. It could be that it's the first game ever that has forced me to get up off my ass, walk over to the 360 and manually restart it because the game had frozen up on me, or it could be that the first time I load into New York and finally get to that part of the game, I loaded up under a bridge, under some dirt, in water, with only one direction (the wrong one, naturally) being open for movement, resulting in desynchronization. It could be that every single "training" mission, introducing me to new skills and game options, has been utterly useless (read: that which you train, is in no way central to the game, and if you don't actively seek out these things, you will not have to do them again), or maybe just that riding a horse is pretty much impossible unless you stay on the road. It could be that those "run through buildings" doors and windows that were advertised as so cool and special, are far and few between, or it could be that the game only ever feels open and free when I'm not doing a mission (entering a village from the wrong direction will not trigger the needed cut-scene and thus the game will not proceed). Maybe it's that the "marker" on the screen is some Animus-styled almost invisible shimmering that you will not see unless you're really really close, or maybe it's that the Desmond part of the game is so skimped on that it feels like it might as well have been left out.

    All in all I think my disappointment with this game all boils down to it being chalk-full of bugs and glitches, the controls feeling wonky and the gameplay very unbalanced. The storyline is far from as engaging as has been the case with the previous editions, the lead character is bland and forgettable, memorable characters are few and there is little cohesion between the Animus world and the real world. A lot was advertised, and little was delivered. With the past four games holding such high quality, naturally there were high expectations... but sadly, very few were met. If you want a linear cinematic that looks great, but don't care too much about playability (or just don't care about your time and money), then by all means, get the game. If you want playability, value your time and money, and ultimately don't want to be let down by the Assassin's Creed series, watch the Desmond and precursor story on YouTube and avoid the get the game.

    AC3 in short: a huge disappointment.
    Expand
  9. Dec 31, 2012
    5
    The fundamental gameplay is still there for AC3. The addition of sea battles and a ship you can work to upgrade was great. The revolutionary period was an awesome stage for the 3rd AC3 and final in the Desmond storyline. That's about it. Storyline was botched and it is very easy to see where and how corners were cut to push this game out. After playing and honestly enjoying the first 2 offerings from this franchise AC3 failed to match up and had the feeling it was rushed through production. From lots of glitches in fighting, free running and maps to an economy system that was very hard to understand. Then you get to the disappointing and short ending. Its time for us to expect more out of these blockbuster franchise games, it will net a fortune regardless of critic review but the long term prospects of subsequent releases will suffer due to its unpolished nature all in order to save a dollar now. Expand
  10. Dec 31, 2012
    6
    AC3 is a game that starts out well - you get introduced to a really great character, the storyline progression feels natural and there's some overall sense of direction. Some hours into the game though the "real" protagonist (Connor) is introduced and from that point onwards the game gets progressively worse. Connor is a boring bloke without any kind of personality or purpose. The plot - even the one in the Animus - is bonkers as well with almost every other story mission being a historical event shoehorned in to make Connor play some completely nonsensical part in it.

    I'm afraid there hasn't been an AC game with a good story since AC2. That one had character, interesting locations, a good plot. This one not so much. I'd say if you can get it cheaply it's worth a try but don't expect too much from it.
    Expand
  11. Dec 30, 2012
    0
    i would like to give this game a 6-7 but the climbing tree part of this game is downright broken and that's a big part of the game! it feels untested! so just because i can 0/10
  12. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    Expected much more than I got. It really is unfortunate that they'd incorporate such a bad ending in an attempt to milk the series in the future. Don't expect anything groundbreaking.
  13. Dec 29, 2012
    2
    Its a copy paste AC game... There is absolutely nothing knew to this AC game besides the story. The gameplay is exactly the same as the others. If you want a good AC game take up brotherhood, where you have options on how to play along with an amazing story. Even the main character outside of the levels goes, "oh this again?" Whenever he begins a sequence.
  14. Dec 28, 2012
    6
    'I didn't know Zynga made themed boxed sets?' Having been a tragic fanboy of this series since way back at instalment #1, I found myself at a loss as to how to feel about this game. Even from the outset. YES they changed my beloved control setup, and YES the new animus interface is less intuitive than before. But then I wonder how many people would be whining about the lack of innovation in the new title if everything had stayed the same in that regard. I don't think the writing is the problem, because from the outset I LOVED Haytham, and I found myself drawn in to Connor. He may be a bit of a blank slate, but I don't think he is an especially WOODEN one. No. What bugs me about this game didn't really hit me until just before: it's all the mini-games. Granted AC#1 had an exceptionally simple set-up, (triply so if you played it on a console), and the AC2 trilogy addressed this by adding additional things to do, a few mini-games, and some interesting one-time mechanics in the odd side-quest or story mission. I started to get wary of all the extra padding though in Revelations with the new territory mechanic, and the tower-defense game, but THANKFULLY they weren't necessary to the completion of the game. There was still enough assassination to get you through the game without having to worry about it. AC3 though. The mini games aren't mini games anymore. It's as though someone's taken all the content of SPORE and made us play all the stages simultaneously. In Brotherhood or Revelations I could send recruits out on a mission and so long as there were enough of them with enough skill, they would succeed. In AC3 if I send a wagon to market and it gets attacked I have to track it down and defend it or lose the shipment. What happens if I'd rather just stab people than play farmville? Then there's the Naval part of the game. Bloody brilliant, but I need LOTS of money to upgrade that boat of mine which means lots of grinding away at babysitting caravans doesn't it? I could always try my luck at gambling but the use of games common to the era means I can LEARN the rules but they will take a longer time to master well enough to consistently beat the AI and make it viable. So the problem has become one of time... and I don't have time to play Assassin's Creed: Farmville the way it wants to be played. To completion, grinding away my life behind a keyboard playing an imaginary man's dead ancestor. Even with all the extra mechanics the game was fine (I actually loved the new mechanic for opening fast-travel spots), fine that is right up until I had a house and harbour to get up to spec. Then the game slows right down becoming instead of a quest for vengeance, it's a quest to be the richest man in colonial america, in what I can ONLY assume is some ridiculous attempt to pad out an ALREADY long game. I'm assuming at least. The previous titles were all certainly long enough without farmville attached. Imagine if Bioware had decided to pad out ANY of the Mass Effect titles by forcing you to engage in a spotlight stealing mini-game (and I use the prefix MINI loosely in this context) between story missions just so you can survive the next one. The game is simply too complex, and not in any good way. The story is lost under acres of clutter and would be much better served by some simplicity. It's telling that the more complex these games have gotten, the less I have replayed them. I played the first Assassin's creed to death waiting for number 2, and it wasn't levelling up my reputation with the thieves guild or having a guild den in every major port on the Mediterranean that did THAT, it was the context-dependent combat and the flawless execution of a mission that kept me coming back. NOT wanting to see how many wagons full of lumber I could get running back and forth to market (okay maybe there were SOME flags involved...). Expand
  15. Dec 28, 2012
    9
    I've played (and completed) AC2, AC2:Brotherhood and AC2:Revelations....honestly, with AC3 I'm having more fun and I'm enjoying the story much more than with any of the previous releases.
    This story (AC3) is the best yet written in the entire series (from my point of view, of course). I mean, what the hell was Machiavelli doing in AC2:Brotherhood? And what about da Vinci? If you want to
    use such historical characters in a fictional renaissance story, at least take it seriously. In my opinion both characters were poorly represented/superficially conceived (like a sorry postcard), I found them embarrassing... In fact, not only historical characters were underdeveloped, I also think they could've improved Ezio's story a big deal if they had put a mind to it (I'm not saying it's rubbish, I'm just saying it could've been better). Don't get me wrong, AC2 trilogy was praiseworthy (for arcade open world standards) in my opinion.
    Concerning AC2 trilogy's story, I found it wanting in various occasions...on the other hand, I think that AC2:Revelations finale was very touching: Ezio meets Altaïr's skeleton, speaks to Desmond "trough the centuries" (great concept) and then retires considering his work fulfilled. I didn't really expect much from AC3, now I find myself delightfully surprised. I liked the story right from the start: you find yourself in the flesh of Haytham Kenway (England 1754), who is attending a revival of the "Beggar's Opera" in the Royal Opera House in London. He enters the auditorium, tries to reach his seat while stepping on other people's feet in the process and starts apologizing to them in turn (I found it hilarious and original, a great way to open the story)...he doesn't care for the opera, of course, there's something else in his mind...
    If AC3 was conceived like a movie of some sort, a lot of people would probably like it. This means that AC3 screenwriters have done a good job both establishing the main plot and designing characters, dialogs and scenes. For example, I'm still laughing at Benjamin Franklin's dissertation about the advantages of taking older women as lovers (this was a REAL letter by Benjamin Franklin written on June 25,1745. The game developers were simply outstanding here.).
    Perhaps the story loses some of its grip while playing Ratonhnhaké:ton (Connor), but truth is that I like to hunt game and explore the native american forests, I like my tomahawk and I like the fact that the main character is a Mohawk who tries to defend his people and their way of life (mohawks in the game speak traditional mohawk, by the way, that's another merit of AC3)
    The music in this game is great (specially because of sailor shanties and native american tribal music).
    They introduced historical board games like the Roman Checkers (I love them).
    Now you can fight naval battles (unrealistic, OF COURSE, like almost all things in the AC saga, in case you haven't noticed). I see various people here complaining about controls, clichés, predictable turns of events, glitches, lack of immersion, lack of freedom, lack of creativity, dumb action scenes, unrealistic fights, etc.

    1-As far as I can see, they mainly changed two key bindings. Now you use "E" instead of "Shift" and "Q" instead of "E"...that's about it...you can customize them anyway so I don't see the problem here. 2-There aren't more clichés or predictable turns in AC3 than they were in previous releases... I mean, I knew Ezio was going to beat everyone long before it happened...

    3-Maybe it's just that I'm lucky, but my AC3 installation doesn't have those horrible glitches some people is talking about.

    4-Personally, I can cope with the game's plot "jumping" between characters (this already happened in previous releases), so it's not a problem for me. Just one question to all people who is complaining about this: How do you expect to develop this plot (which is divided in different stories) without jumping between characters? 5-You can still explore Boston, the forests, the frontier, New York, etc. at your will. The game allows the player to do it... So I still don't know why there is people saying that you can't explore the scenarios freely. There are document fragments to be catched, trinkets to be found, messages to be delivered, naval battles to be fought, forts to be destroyed, trade to be established, game to be hunted, treasures to be claimed, missions to be completed,etc. Perhaps there are less sub-missions than in other releases, but there is still a lot to be done in the game, you can be busy if you want to.

    6-For those who haven't noticed yet, AC series is COMPLETELY unrealistic.
    I mean: haystacks don't save your life, the world isn't some kind of "puzzle" where everything is placed to accommodate your magical acrobatics. Killing is not easy, "medicine" can't restore broken bones and bullet/arrow shots, etc,etc...
    Expand
  16. Dec 28, 2012
    6
    Ubisoft's 'Assassin's Creed III' marks the end of a saga of heroism, bloodshed and absolute epicness. However, the game has left a sour taste in my mouth as the change in controls, layout and overall experience has shaken me. I found it difficult to combat my enemies without being punched in the face everytime i countered or blocked which would decrease my health. I also found that the bugs and glitches of previous games had not yet been fixed such as the cape dissappearing into the horse your riding, or being blocked by invisible walls or just the occassional **** up in controls leading you to a 500ft plunge off a church building. The game's story is really interesting with the tale of colonized America and a native taking the role of an assassin to hunt his father and restore equality to America. The historical relevance and gameplay makes the experience feel real and interesting, however it is bogged down by repeditive cutscenes and small amount of gameplay. The maps are too large leading to confusion and more bugs and the shops are not plentiful. There is very little customization and the game fails to make you feel individual as a master assassin by not allowing this. Overall though, the game delivers a playable and mildly enjoyable campaign which im sure i will, no doubt, sit on my couch, play it through once missing all the challenges because I can't be stuffed and then recycle it for store credit at my nearest JB-HI FI. Expand
  17. Dec 28, 2012
    9
    AC3 has its own story and should not necessarily be compared with the previous AC storylines. What was needed was more missions. Yes, there is a bit too much dialogue, and I disliked the interruptions into the Animus/Desmond scenes more than I ever did before. The naval battles are great. Overall, it deserves a score of 9. Playability is great on a PC especially if you've played the previous AC series. I have played it twice and enjoyed it more the second time. Expand
  18. Dec 28, 2012
    3
    Amazing graphics and cinematics... but that's about it. Ubisoft no longer pays any attention to PC gamers, who prefer to play with mouse and keyboard. Game is completely reliant on a controller and if you don't have one or don't like playing with one, you cannot play this game because the controls are impossible. This is a big one to me, as I've always been a big fan of the AC series, even back when it didn't reach that much publicity. Now I am forced to use a controller, something I do not enjoy in the slightest, to play one of my favorite franchises. The combat and gameplay is completely lineair, blocking off any creativity from the player. If you're looking for a good assassin game, I'd recommend Dishonored as I have had way more fun playing that than AC III, despite it's superior graphics. Assassin's Creed III is no asset to the franchise, instead it looks like it's going down the same road as the ever-criticized Call of Duty. Save yourself the frustration and the money, unless you're a die-hard fan of the AC lore, don't buy AC III. Expand
  19. Dec 26, 2012
    4
    COTSCENE kill 5.... COTSCENE walk 5 meters... COTSCENE press one button... COTSCENCE. 3 for the facial animations and the blood... fap fap fap +1 for the ship fights. the rest mehhhh. I am curious what's next on ASSASSins LOST!? Who's responsible ****
  20. Dec 26, 2012
    0
    First of all, I never finished brotherhood, so I had to go back and play it again. Then I had to Play Revelations because I had never played it, just finished that one 2 days ago. First of all, let's start comparing Assassin's Creed III to Brotherhood. In Brotherhood, you were practically thrown into the city of Rome, with no armor, limited weapons, and no money. But, you had the opportunity to go around exploring and climbing viewpoints. The viewpoints revealed Borgia Towers, which after liberated, would reveal new shops to renew, thus you would make more money. By contrast Assassin's Creed III is set in Boston, and although there are viewpoints to climb, there is no reason to climb them, because there is nothing to do. All the viewpoints do is reveal the map and that is it. Don't expect the familiar areas to liberate, shops to renew, weapons and armor to buy, assassins to recruit type of deal. All I have been doing so far in this game is finishing one main mission, watching a cut scene, then going to another main mission and watching another cut scene, then once again going to another main mission with a huge cut scene. There are only two side missions: collecting almanac pages and courier missions. The courier missions give you money, but it is useless, because there is nothing to buy and no shops to buy anything from. All you have is a pistol, your assassin's blade and a sword, which you buy at the begging and that is it, that's pretty much all you get. For the past few cut scenes, the story line is centers on Conway liberating other dudes, although he says he's going to explain why, he still hasn't...hopefully I will find that out after I watch a little bit more cut scenes. If you are planning to buy this game, I warn you, it's mostly just an interactive cut scene as far as I can tell. The element's that make Assassin's Creed are missing thus far ( I am still in the Haytham Conway part of the game) there's nothing to do on the map, except walk to the next main mission. Expand
  21. Dec 25, 2012
    6
    The game was lots of fun to play, but still falls short of it's predecessor, AC2, despite turning things around a bit from the downward spiral that was Brotherhood and Revelations. While it removes the poorly instated novelties that seemed there for only for the sake of novelty, it's not the game I wish it was. The overhaul of the combat mechanics was refreshing, and the open world movement seems more fluid now, but the team cannot seem to build controls that are fully functional with a keyboard mouse interface. The mouse-look movement was sporadic and inconsistent, and the lack of customization, and keys that are used for more than one function are consistent with a poorly ported console title.

    The story was garbage, and obviously pandering to a patriotic U.S. market. It could have been a beautiful tragedy of the day the Assassins started to lose their fight, moving them to where they are today. Instead it is drivel about one man almost single handedly building the new world and killing elk.
    Expand
  22. Dec 25, 2012
    0
    Ubisoft sells this product "as is," i.e., without any kind of useful warranty whatsoever. When a merchant does this, it is a tell-tale sign that they have no faith in their product and that you can expect shoddy workmanship. Assassin's Creed 3 lives up to the non-guarantee Ubisoft promises. It is an embarrassing, bug-riddled mess. As numerous players have reported, the game crashes frequently and without warning, sometimes forcing a system reboot. If this happens, you had better hope the game isn't saving your progress, or you will lose your entire savegame data, like I did. Moreover, despite Ubisoft touting that the game was being optimized for PC, and that it was necessary to delay it longer than its console counterparts, the game runs terribly on the PC. Expect to see frequent FPS drops despite very little actual GPU usage. For some reason, the game makes use of only a single core of the CPU and that is causing massive bottlenecks. Don't expect Ubisoft tech support to help you either: they will blame it on your drivers even if they are up to date. When I asked them for help getting a refund they told me to shove off. Expand
  23. Dec 24, 2012
    6
    Since 2007 I've been following and loyal to the Assassin's Creed series from the release of the first game. I watched the games grow and expand to the triple AAA franchise it is today. When I heard about the Assassins Creed 3 upcoming release, I was really excited. I've watched the E3 game play videos countless times and pre-ordered since day one. However when October 31st came around and my copy of the game came in, I thought that AC3 would definitely win 2012 game of the year, but turned out to be a disappointment. The game has a great introduction and brings the player up to speed about the Assassin and Templar conflict and how Desmonds trying to save the world. You get in the animus and play the tutorial and try out the games many new features and your probably thinking to yourself "wow this is a great game, look at all those new features ubisoft implemented to this new installment!" However once you're done with that the game goes downhill from there. The Pacing is god awful. I understand that you need to set the charters and setting, but the game literally takes you about 4 hours until you can start playing this so called "open-world" game. Speaking of open world, the games so called AnvilNext game engine that claims they can run over 100 NPCS and can" render seamless worlds of nearly infinite possibility, transporting you deep inside America before it was 'America.' From vivid, natural landscapes, to accurate portrayals of life during The American Revolution" is a **** lie. The game is so glitchy it makes Skyrim look like its glitch free, running on 60 FPS. Heres an example. I'm in Boston, one of the main settings in the game and I'm trying to run up a building. the game suffers from so many slowdowns it just doesn't make it enjoyable. To much pop in with NPCS and buildings a whole just ruin the experience. The story is mediocre and not as absorbing as Assassin's Creed II . Conner as a character is satisfactory and is just too serious. Fortunately, the graphics are great, but like I said before, the glitches will turn you off. However the Frontier is great with the new tree climbing and mountain scaling parkour. I find the Frontier the only setting in the game where glitches wont appear as often. All in all this game totally doesn't deserve a 10 nor does it deserve and 0 or a 1. I give this game a 6, soley for Ubisoft's somewhat effort to avoid repetition from previous games and make a jump from the over saturated franchise that it is today. Assassin's Creed III is sloppy, unpolished and rushed product that had so much potential. Expand
  24. Dec 23, 2012
    3
    AC3 is an exercise in frustration. I know that I am in the minority here, but I hate this game. Which is shocking, considering that I love the all of the other AC games (yes, I even liked Revelations despite its flaws). I feel that the Ubisoft Montreal has been trying to pack more and more activities into each iteration and this has taken focus away from the core mechanics put into place in AC1 and refined to perfection in AC2. Not that I minded the extras built into each chapter, I just found that Brotherhood and Revelations were veering into territory that moved away from what made AC2 great.

    AC3 has obviously been designed with the 'more is better' school of thought in mind and I for one am getting tired of the focus on quantity over quality. In this case, less would have been more. The characters are worthless (including Connor and Desmond), the story felt hacked together like the writers had no idea where to take the series after Ezio, and the missions are rubbish (despite what reviewers are saying). I can only think of one or two that were actually entertaining. Oh, all of the praise that is being heaped on the 'naval' missions - it is essentially Sid Meier's Pirates but more modern. Not one thing in this game is revolutionary and despite all of the raving going on about how it is an achievement for the series, I actually found that AC3 is more linear and less entertaining than the first AC game, just more awkward and confusing. Combat is rubbish, pathfinding is rubbish, running around the forest is NOT fun after the first ten minutes, the cities are bland and not very fun, there is no room for your character to grow, items in game are super expensive (seriously, 24 bullets costed 2000 pounds? Really?). The list goes on...

    Why are people raving over a game that really should have taken a critical lambasting for being lazy and rushed?
    Expand
  25. Dec 23, 2012
    1
    Might be one of the biggest face plants in game design history. I would guess that roughly 60% of the game is pointless filler. Gameplay is sometimes entertaining. Mostly maddening. Ending felt like it was written by a fourteen-year-old. As a tree climbing simulator I would give this game a 10. The harbor chase near the end...wtf Ubi. Wtf. That's the climactic finish? Punish **** us repeatedly by having to perfectly run a gauntlet 50 times? High fives all around, right guys? Amazing! I hope everyone involved with the making of this game was fired. Expand
  26. Dec 23, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. i really do not get why some people hate this game so much...the developers had made this clear that this game will be an end to desmond's story and after all his goal was to stop the 2012 incident...so there clearly is no reason to get angry over something that you already knew ...the combat was simply awesome and addicting and that includes the naval combat . the story was good but you only get to play as connor with his suit halfway through the game which isnt that bad if you think that the game itself unfolds halfway through the game...and that means that once you get your hands on the actual character you have so many more things to do that are fun . what the game lacks is perhaps the assassination contracts that have been technically been absent from brotherhood. overall this game is awesome and none can deny that this game is fun as hell Expand
  27. Dec 23, 2012
    4
    Honestly, I could almost copy my Far Cry 3 review over here since this game suffers from the same issues. AC3 as well is a prime example of mass produced casual garbage. It also suffers from a complete lack of creativity and vision, not to mention the same dreadful casualisation that aims to take all challenge out of the game and make everything so simple that even a monkey who fell as baby from a tree and badly hit it's head could do it. Why I'm giving it a higher rating than Far Cry 3 (Rating 1)? It's because the world is a little more immersive and you at least don't see blinking weapon and ammunition vendor machines in this game. Expand
  28. Dec 22, 2012
    5
    This game started out so promising. I really enjoyed the storytelling in the beginning of the game. I think that Haythum is a much better character and a much better actor. Then middle of the game flounders along and never seems to gain any traction. The ending is terrible.

    All the side missions, crafting, trading, and such do very little to enhance the game. Worse yet you have to
    finish or nearly finish the game before you can really see that stuff to the end. What's the point? Once the story is over I'm done. I'm not going to hang out in the frontier and craft sewing thread and buttons... Pretty disappointing. I thought Revelations was the series low but now I think AC3 has out done it. Expand
  29. Dec 22, 2012
    9
    This was the best game I've played in a long time, and I've played many games in the past few years. The story was excellent, the graphics and mechanics were great, and I never ran into the problems other people have encountered (i.e. horses not going where you wan them to). I can only complain of the ending and, while it's a fitting way to end Desmond's story, I can't help but feel that it was all for nothing. The ending to Desmond's story is just a speck of dust in the infinite possibilities of the Assassin's Creed universe. Expand
  30. Dec 22, 2012
    10
    Assassin's creed III may have a few faults but it makes the original look like a pile of crap. And since the first Assassin's Creed was pretty damn good, that should tell you something about AC3.
  31. Dec 21, 2012
    0
    biggest disappointment in 2012 is definitive AC3, at least for people which played the full AC line, The. player controls are a full downgrade from ACB / ACR to AC3, the whole story lacks of transitions, sometimes you jump into somewhere where you dont have the slightest clue what happened before, AC3 is more or less a 60 $ Cut scene video clips, lots of hours of gameplay is watching the video clips, so that you might, or might not get the story, lots of things make no sense after all. However one of the really bad things i figured is that its literally a bug release, i am sure they wanted to role out before xmas thou, however the stockingpiling menu f.e. is totally broken, some buttons dont work and you cant quit, there, CTD the game and restart doesnt help cause you jump to the broken menue right away, i finally found some forum posts on how to fix it, but still unbelivable to me how they can release so many bugs in a quite expensive retail version. the 85 metascore is unfort. a total fake, i guess they are forced to put it so that they dont loose ubi as advertiser, still sad to see, that games which are really bad, are recommend here! Expand
  32. Dec 20, 2012
    7
    Even though I haven't had good luck with the Assassin's Creed series, I succumbed to the hype and bought this game. First of all, its an interesting historical novel with a science fiction twist, and a touch of the DaVinci code (references to the Knights Templar). If you're a history buff, you'll appreciate the short background notes with their combination of historical accuracy and dramatic license. I read a few of the notes as I played the game and there was some funny sarcastic remarks sprinkled throughout. Secondly, the graphics were outstanding, even though the intentional fading in/out got a little old. Also, my XPS-8100 with Intel 5 processor and GT-220 card seemed to handle the complex graphics quite well. However, this game becomes annoyingly frustrating at times. In my limited view, the gameplay is too complex. For example, you need three keyboard entries to fire a musket or shoot an arrow. Additionally, moving your character around is difficult at times when you are trying to run away and the character shifts into melee anytime it gets close to the opposition. Still, this game was fun, and I felt a sense of accomplishment when I finally finished it after 30+ hours of playing time. Expand
  33. Dec 20, 2012
    3
    So far it's good, not great though. the graphics have improved over Revelations and the gameplay is a lot simpler (for the better) BUT in pretty much half the missions you have absolutely no idea what to do and after failing a few times you figure out how to progress, plus the actual design of the different levels you get thrown into during missions is herendous, it's almost impossible to get 100% synchronization in most levels, I still have no idea what the developers were smoking when they designed these areas and it is extremely infuriating. The story is alright for an AC game and some of the characters interesting, but most are pretty one-dimensional and boring as heck. Overall it's leaving me a bit disappointed, it's like Ubisoft added some really interesting mechanics to the game but at the same time COMPLETELY butchered what made previous games great, and forgot how to design levels in the process, AND completely threw away any form of guidance to help you figure out what the hell you're doing half the time. This is supposed to be a great starting point for new players to the series but if an AC veteran that has played every single game in the series gets totally confused and frustrated half the time how the heck is someone new to the series supposed to get through the entire campaign?? All in all AC 3 is basically a mess, a shiny mess, yes. But still a mess Expand
  34. Dec 18, 2012
    8
    Let me preface this by saying the only truly good Assassin's Creed game was 2. Brotherhood and Revalations were just cheap shadows of Assassin's Creed 2. Having said that, I love Assassin's Creed 3. I think it is set in a fantastic time period, with great movement and combat mechanics, and awesome voice acting. When I started playing, I thought I was in for another amazing A.C. like I had been missing since the 2nd one. However, after playing about halfway through the game I became more and more frustrated with what I can only how is a series of bugs and errors. The guards detection abilities and line of sight are often inhuman. They spin 180 at the drop of a pin, the can see in a 270 degree arc, and sometimes they simply know where you are and what your doing. On top of that I've been killed by soldiers during a cutscene, how my inventory wiped clean a couple of times, and several other bugs I wont go into. But more disappointing than the all the bugs that persist despite their massive patch, is that the game seems to want you to have to fight everyone. In AC games past, I was able to complete most everything without being noticed, or at the very least killing everyone quitey, and with relative ease I might add. As of 1/3 of the way through this game I and finding it difficult to complete several missions without direct confrontation. And before I hear a score of, "Your just not good at the game" or "Get better" i assure you that I am quite an accomplished gamer and very good that this game. I summary, Ubisoft was so close to remaking the magic that was Assassin's Creed 2 only to fall short by 2 steps. 1 the story wasn't quite as good, and 2 they released the game to soon...it just wasn't finished yet. Expand
  35. Dec 16, 2012
    5
    Initially I was really enjoying the game... Story and game play start off strong. Fighting is amazing. Graphically the cities of Boston and New York look great but both look very similar which was disappointing. The open country is ok but only makes me yearn for Skyrim. Hunting is a joke PERIOD! Ability to run and jump on branches is so unrealistic and just dumb in my opinion. Not sure why they included Naval missions at all, it seems so out of place for this type of game. Half way through I was getting very tired of the linear missions that forced you with one cut scene after another to do missions a specific way. The Ending was so ridiculously stupid that i say let us never speak of Assassin Creed ever again. Expand
  36. Dec 16, 2012
    1
    Fail and disappointment f the year :( That's very sad because I'm big fan of AC series and was waiting hardly this part to come out. First, this is NOT AC game at all. Everything good from AC2, ACB and ACR is gone. Controls are totally changed and practically unplayable. For first 30 minutes be sure to make popcorns because there is 30 minutes unskipable boring animated sequences series. Overall, unplayable game which have nothing in common with good old AC games. Everything except nice graphics is bad in this game. Expand
  37. Dec 15, 2012
    9
    The game is not without flaws. I have jumped 150 meters in the air and fallen to my death. I have found jumping from on object to another isn't as fluid sometimes as others. A couple of times I've have failed to meet goals of a mission and I didn't know it was a goal. The beginning of the game was quite slow to me. In spit of these minor and far and few between little annoying things the game is solid as a whole. I love the ship captain missions it really looks and feels like a ship plunging into waves and fights are amazing. The ground fights are fluid and flowing; different mobs need be engaged differently with breaks monotony in fights unlike the first of the series. I'm 80% into the campaign and the story is fore filling and rewarding. I've enjoyed the side quests (besides collecting feathers which is tedious and unrewarding) The crafting/trading/bartering system is slow at times but the rewards make it worth it if you invest the time. Overall I'm very happy I spent the $50 on the game and I would do it again given the chance to relive it. Expand
  38. Dec 15, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I went in to Assassin's Creed III expecting something similar to the AC2 trilogy with a different control scheme. How wrong I was. I'd started to get a little tired of our Italian friend Ezio Auditore da Firenze. Don't get me wrong - AC2, Brotherhood, Revelations... These were all great games, but they had Call of Duty/EA Sports syndrome - the same game with minor upgrades released yearly. Fortunately for Ubisoft, and gamers, they were damn fine games. But as I said, AC3 isn't a repeat of the last three years. But is that a good thing? Of course it is!

    Assassin's Creed III picks up right were Revelations ended - Desmond, his father, and the two remaining assassin buddies Rebecca and Shaun have found the temple they've been searching for. Now all they need is a key to get in to the inner chamber and save the world from a solar flare. Makes sense? Not really, but it does the trick for letting us mess around in various historical settings. The explanation for the new setting is... Well, there really isn't one. The "ones that came before" just happen to know how to make the animus work and give Desmond a new ancestor to relive the memories of.

    Now this is where I venture into some serious spoiler territory, so skip the next (and rather large) paragraph if you don't want early to mid-game spoilers.

    London, mid 18th century. A crowded theatre, it's patrons awaiting the start of a play. A well-dressed and well-spoken man by the name of Haytham Kenway enters, and starts talking to his associate. Shortly afterwards, it's off to climb around the theatre and assassinate someone. Haytham steals his necklace, which is believed to be the key to the temple Desmond and company have just found. Haytham then travels to America, and you get a good couple of hours to mess around in Boston as him. It's pretty much the standard Assassin's Creed fare - climb buildings to get to view points and un-fog the map, kill the angry guards with your hidden blades, and so on. I think Haytham is probably the most well-written character the series has come out with thus far. After a few missions, some surprising plot twists occur, which I won't spoil as they're actually really cool, and you start out playing as Haytham's half-native American son, Connor, a few years later. This is the "growing up" part, where you get your assassin training and so on. The game opens up bit by bit, and then things start to get really interesting. I must mention the few missions where you play as Desmond in 2012 - they're great fun, if a little linear. I tried ripping down the wanted posters when I first saw them, but to no avail! Still, a nice touch to see them around.

    The new gameplay mechanics - hunting wildlife, gathering resources, crafting new gear, trading - these are all well-implemented and keep things interesting. Killing a bear is great fun. The free-running feels much different this time around, as you're out in the countryside a lot, climbing through trees and cliffs as opposed to buildings and streets. There's a nice juxtaposition between the country and the cities of Boston and New York, keeping the game fresh for hours.

    Combat's had a nice overhaul, but is still a little too easy for the most part. The addition of guns is nice, but they take a long time to reload, so your bow is usually a better - and stealthier - option.
    The real main attraction, however, is the naval missions. You captain a ship, giving orders to your crew to adjust sails, man cannons, and so on. It's well-implemented and doesn't feel like an after-thought - unlike Revelations' tower defence mini-game.

    The Assassin Brotherhood is still there, but for the most part it's optional. Fast travel's improved, and the awful villa/city management has been overhauled. You now meet new people and build a small settlement around your mentor's manor. It's got great story elements and is more mission-based than money-based.

    There's plenty of mini-games to do, ranging from a few board games to bowls and fight clubs. A lot of content, and surprisingly well thought out. Nothing has been half-done here. Everything seems to have been lovingly crafted, and designed to be great fun. And that's exactly what it is.

    The story missions in colonial America are great fun, and aiming for 100% synchronisation is a great challenge. It's been fleshed out a bit this time around, as there are now multiple bonus objectives as opposed to just the one.

    Graphically, the game is beautiful. On a decent PC, you'll be amazed at what the Assassin's Creed team at Ubisoft has done. Sound design is spot-on as usual, though I preferred some of the music from AC2. The story is great, in my opinion, but I found the ending to be rather lacking. I didn't expect much from it though.

    Overall, Assassin's Creed III is an amazing game that's incredibly difficult to pick fault with. Definitely a game of the year contender, and easily the best open-world adventure released in 2012.
    Expand
  39. Dec 14, 2012
    3
    The bloated decaying corpse of a once great franchise. I have been a fan from the beginning, but this final installment was easily the worst of them all, by a wide margin. All three of the points I have given the game come from the in game graphics, specifically the forest environment. As for the rest of the game, all I can say is awful game design, poor animation and bad writing. One of the strangest things about AC3 is that much of the fun, 'assassin' gameplay of previous titles has been replaced by military themed mini-games. That is where they would actually allow you to play the game - AC3 is easily over 50% lengthy cutscenes, featuring characters which were ultimately dull and aroused no empathy from the viewer. Worse still, I often found the final blow to an enemy was delivered not by me, but in a cutscene. I found myself longing for even the most minor of interaction to feel like I was actually playing a game I had spent £30 on. I would not recommend this game to anyone, it is simply not fun. Expand
  40. Dec 14, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Not sure if actually the worst or the best of the series. Maybe not the worst, AC1 was (because it feels like a test, for example comparing Portal 1 with 2). It was fun and different from the previous games, but I was missing something, maybe because it doesn't play in Italy and the annoying language. The atmosphere was pretty cool though. After I completed the second level on the ocean, heard the music and saw the title, I thought it's gonna be an awesome adventure, but I got dissappointed. Why in the hell would you wanna be Haytham for 4 Sequences (If that's right)? Considering the game won't have any DLC's with story for Connor, the last 8 sequences are not really much for a completely new assassin. They kinda overdid the beginning and made it much longer than it should've be. Some may be good with it, but they should've worked with a more advanced story when it really begins, not to mention the missions are kinda dull, the ending for desmond was literally the "end of the world". I'm not disappointed nor excited about the game. I think I'll leave it with a 6. Expand
  41. Dec 13, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is far from downright awful, but still lacking something the previous instalments had. On a good rig, graphics look really good. The art is amazing (ships, houses, the whole atmosphere). I think the game is a bit too long for its own good. Trade system is quite forgettable: after a while you've bought everything and It becomes useless. Same goes for crafting. Most of the items you create are meant for trade, so it's all back to square one. There are some bugs here and there: most of them are quite annoying (items not working, losing your whole stock of tools at the beginning of each new sequence). What bothers me most is the drastic change in gameplay. Stealth isn't the best option anymore and once you've been spotted, the best way out is to kill everyone around. Indeed, the AI will chase you on very long distances and the number of places where you can hide has been significantly lowered, to the point that you can't hide on roofs anymore (which makes ground the best option when fleeing...) The beginning of the story was enjoyable, but it drags at the end. The ending is laughable, as bad as it gets: compared to that, mass effect 3's ending was a true diamond... Weapons are unbalanced, most of them are not even worth buying. You don't even see any real difference between them. Armor is gone. The whole sense of progression has been kind of raped. Secondary objectives to reach 100% synchronization add a bit of difficulty but don't reward you for completing them. Just like the other episodes, there's no replayability value, but that was expected. I'm not too much of a multiplayer type of gamer, so I haven't quite tested that yet: so far it looks like brotherhood's and revelation's multiplayer with a few new features.

    - All in all -

    Pros: graphics, naval warfare, part of the story, animations.
    Cons: modified gameplay, unbalanced items, bland side quests, lack of freedom in most missions, ending.
    Expand
  42. Dec 11, 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 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 wait for a steam sale. 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
  43. Dec 11, 2012
    2
    Well... before I start, I wanted to tell that I just had to register to write this review. Let it be a warning for anyone who reads the comments here. Assassin's Creed was a great franchise, I loved both episodes and expansions before this. They had their problems, but all in all were great games with a magnificent story, which is not usual these days.

    So to this game. It has some
    annoying bugs, yes, which game does not? Ok, maybe a little too much bugs, but a few patches can solve most of these problems. If you want a game with action, where you can kill enemies by the dozens in a fight and love jumping on trees and houses, this is your game. But, if you like the story too (like me), then just don't bother with this. Cherish the memories of the previous games and pretend like this does not even exists. The start of this game is aweseom, as you expect it, but it is all downhills from here. There will be some plot holes through the story, but the real **** comes at the end. The last few hours of gameplay is like a bad dream come true. The story and all events towards the end are so nonsensical, that it drove me mad. I was like "WTF?" at everything I saw. It literally rapes the story in my eyes and i'm ashamed in place of the creaters for what they have done.

    All in all, if you think Mass Effect 3 had a ****ty ending, then you can not even fathom what waits you here. If you are a fan of the Assassin's Creed games then avoid this like the plaque.

    I only gave 2 points for the great 2 previous episodes, this deserves a 0 as a standalone game.
    Expand
  44. Dec 11, 2012
    0
    After good AC1, much better AC2 and best AC: Brotherhood, we have here revelations and AC3. Sadly it seems that Revelations and AC3 were made with different dev team that made AC1-2. AC3 is probably the worst. Dumbed down to it knees, fight mechanic, free runing... everything. No options for player, everything is scripted. You cannot control when and where to jump. Just press ASDW and everything is done for you. Occasionally (or more often) you just press E and another script will do everything for you. Cut scenes on every move, "press E" on every corner.. Overall for completing the game you just need 5 buttons- ASDW and E. I was looking forward to this game, but it seems that i will skip this release and will just look at the end cutscene on youtube and im done.... Im very sad that developers slapdash last two releases and ruined my whole AC enthusiasm :( Expand
  45. Dec 10, 2012
    6
    Pros -Great atmosphere and history -Amazing and humorous detail in the database -Fun combat -Incredible Naval Battles Cons -BORINGLY SLOW beginning of the game, spend 4+ hours as a different character and the boy version of Connor doing stupid fetch quests -Crap game economy, can go throughout the game without buying a thing -Heavy reliance on cutscenes, most of which are slow -Terrible replacement of building running with tree running, no longer fun to run atop of rooftops, because guards spot and kill you instantly
    -Relatively Bad U.I
    -TERRIBLE gun/throwing weapon controls

    Overall, AC3 is a huge letdown in the AC series, and a disappointment to the stealth genre
    Expand
  46. Dec 10, 2012
    0
    **** Assassin's creed title yet. There is a lot to do, but absolutely nothing is fun. Combat is just silly and once you watch an hour of combat you have seen it all. Sidequests don't feel important. Stealth no longer feels important or fun for that matter. Connor is a dipsh*t. The story doesn't make sense.
  47. Dec 9, 2012
    7
    Terrible consolitis. A mash up of all the game mechanics from previous AC games, makes the journey a confusing chore - disappointing because the story is very exciting... albeit with a rather flaccid ending.
  48. Dec 9, 2012
    7
    Sure, the third AC is mostly overhyped and overpraised, especially on the big videogame portals, but it's definitely NOT a dud. The animus-part story is miles better, more complex and more layered than the rather dull wanderings of Altair or the cheesy, cartoonish escapades of Ezio. Yes, Desmond is a stupid character but I rather like the outside-animus sci-fi story, although the brief Desmond gameplay stuff itself is just terrible. It's almost if instead of putting some real effort in making the Desmond parts better Ubi bosses said: "Folks don't like Desmond so let's make his part as short and simple as is necessary for the overall story." Another improvements over the previous installments - minigames are finally fun, especially the naval battles, which are fantastic, and the hunting, which is very acceptable. And almost all the side characters are very likeable and well dubbed (especially Haytham). Oh and I also LOVE the way this game handles difficulty - the basic campaign is so easy a 5 year old could cakewalk it while watching cartoons but most optional objectives can be VERY difficult. So you CAN finish the game in under 20 hours (10 if you skip the cinematics) but if you like some extra challenge, you can grow old and crazy trying to do the 100% sync.
    *********
    Now to the not so good things about AC3. The graphics is a mixed bag. The cities are great, as usual, and the naval part is simply phenomenal. But although the Frontier has it's shining moments, it's marred by really bad textures, pop-ups and overall inescapable feeling that the game has been made primarily for 8 years old console hardware. It just shows. Even the first Crysis is still miles ahead when it comes to forest environments. Of course Ubi is not to blame here - Microsoft and Sony are.
    *********
    And now for the cons. First and foremost - Connor. Everything that's been said about him is true. He is humouress, dull, moody, annoying and interacts with NPCs like a computer trying to pass the Turing test. It's also disappointing you can't go parkouring over the rooftops anymore because the streets are too wide and there are guards on every second roof. But the biggest disappointment is the way the whole game is put together. As I said, the main story itself is fun and interesting, but the gameplay is...well, almost boring. It's usually about walking from point A to point B and watching a cutscene. And, if you're lucky, the game let's you press a button in a critical moment. More often than not if feels like an interactive movie than an actual game. And for the side missions and optional activities the exact opposite is true. Improving your homestead, hunting, crafting, trading - all of it is quite fun but completely pointless and useless. Yes you can skin animals and craft weapons and sell your produce but what for? There's almost no difference between the available weapons, you'll massacre a redcoat regiment with the basic sword just as easily as with the ultimate endgame model. There's also NO gameplay difference between the available outfits, except they look different. So even though you can spend countless hours collecting feathers and improving your homestead and whatnot all you get is a stupid T-shirt, basically. Furthermore you can't actually buy anything useful for the money you make from craftin and trading, maybe except a map of chests containing - more money. "But you can do all these things just for the enjoyment of seeing your homestead grow and prosper or for the fun of the hunt," I hear some of you objecting. But for me, in an action adventure game like this, all these side activities just feel pointless. I enjoy building my town economy in Settlers or SimCity or Colonization as much as the other guy but those games are ABOUT building and trading. AC3 is about crushing the Templars and how does crafting barrels and skinning rabbits help you with that?
    *******
    So the verdict - AC3 definitely feels epic and expensive. It exudes the money and expertise and astounding artistic talent that went into making it. But it also feels like the fantastically talented team of writers, artists, architects, historians and programmers was steered by a very poor lead designer. Despite all of that, it's still a towering achievement in the vast sea of stupidity, shallowness, cheesiness and desperate run-of-the-millness that's the current AAA videogame market.
    Expand
  49. Dec 8, 2012
    1
    I love this series. I'm actually kinda heart broken. They tried to do a lot and couldn't finish it - Everything feels incomplete. Maybe im just an old fart gamer and this is my final, cynical nail - but I highly doubt it. I saw so much potential, patiently waited through the reviews on the consoles and got this baby into my hands.. but then I was hand held for well hours- The optional objectives are unrealistic, confusing. The story while full of merit, and follows the previous template of the other stories - has been over done and feels outlandish. The character portrays native americans as if they were quiet simpletons most of the time - until he makes up his mind on something, and even then, you might find yourself intentionally walking into the enemy, killing someone you wouldn't of thought you would, or losing the ability to communicate like a normal human being and left finally to once again be stuck with hand holding through minor plot points.

    Another reason I'm so annoyed is the UI is awful, and they knew it when they released it. The assassin system is merely an ode to what was made from a super power system - and half the time they don't even work, buggy terrain or just watching on from fences - a near constant immersion breaker. The guild missions are horrible and horribly done with no obvious or explained pro's - and the trade system is pretty much the same, and time consuming for -nothing- Even the Boat missions which are actually rewarding - DON'T EVEN GIVE YOU THE DAMN COSTUME YOU'VE BEEN WEARING THE ENTIRE TIME ON THE BOAT- THEY GIVE YOU SOME OTHER GUYS AND MAKE YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'VE GOT A POTTY ON YOUR HEAD.

    I always thought people hated the assassins creed series because it was a bit lengthy and complex. And for some reason some gamers seem to hate that?!? -This at first seems to play on that.. But then you find yourself struggling to climb trees- buildings with obvious climb points - being rendered unclimbable until you run away and come back. Extremely annoying in some of the missions when your character suddenly decides - he can't climb, has no acrobatic skill - or wants to SUICIDE ON THE SIDE OF A FRIGGIN HAY CART. *Breath* The Developers in this story, take on the role of the templars. They hold all the ideals of a good game but, it's hollow, because all they are interested in now is the money the franchise can generate - not the happiness it could bring those who enjoy it's freedoms. See what I mother f--king did there? Yeah. THATS HOW BAD YOUR WRITING WAS.

    The original three act story has now been fragmented so much everything of relevelence, unique or powerful is near common place. You know modern day security agents only fire one single shot? JUST LIKE THEY ARE USING FLINT LOCKS? It just makes me mouth vomit. But out of respect for where this franchise started I wanted to see the end. No spoilers just the credits. Every other assassins game you could speed through the credits. This one, after a very hollow ending which im not even going to get started on - I was forced to sit through multiple countries and regions credits, like they were PROUD I wasted 70 hours into it - You know what? 8 of those hours I can legitimately put down to the fact that I fell asleep waiting for the credits to roll by, to make sure the game saved and so I could try and finish the assassins missions (which are horrible)

    It's sad that the rest of that time I felt like I was being forced to run or ride around long winding terrain, even to find the fast travel points you have to spend ages dealing with a concept that's extremely unrealistic and that gives very little reward for a lot of time spent. The devs spent a lot of time focusing on the forest - to do it again, to the level where they couldn't even see the trees. I don't want a game of nod too's and references too good games (di vinci's flying machine) - I want substance, details - not quick mash cutscenes - not cutscenes with 'fake' quick mash cutscenes to show me 'how quick' other characters are.

    I think it's just sad. This whole 'lets try and be interactive cinematic' attitude game developers have at the moment is a level of self delusion worth commiting for - You're game designers. Make games. If I wanted a 6 hour movie - I'd call Peter Jackson, If i wanted I hybrid, I'd buy a prius - I come to you for games. Make games. Don't try remodeling the wheel when you don't know crap about the industry you're trying to recreate in a GAME.

    This was written to completion using individual keys instead of just holding the one like you have to through the entire game of assassins creed thanks to the new movement system.

    I was going to give it a 5 - but the Ubisoft 'launcher' (read steam clone which steam launchs so you can play the game) annoyed me so much I had to take off three points (it also accounts for about 30 hours of my 'in game time' on my steam)

    waste of time for all involved.
    Expand
  50. Dec 7, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Assassin Expand
  51. Dec 7, 2012
    0
    Score of 0. Very poorly done and very poorly ported to PC. Horrible controls. Mouse accel is only acceptable on extremes for SP(10) and MP(1). Nothing like any previous games. Stealth is gone. Assassinations are gone. AC is gone. Turning into a COD clone with guns now. UBI robbed us of funds
  52. Dec 7, 2012
    6
    I love the Assassin's Creed series, but this game was like a huge kick in the balls for me. I was extremely excited when I heard they were (finally) moving Assassin's Creed to America but I expected much more. After doing absolutely nothing to improve the game from Brotherhood to Revelations they decided to keep everything they did before except smaller buildings and a larger free-roam map. The thing that really pissed me off was the crappiest intro known to man. If you want to know exactly how to make people not want to play your game. Make the intro on a boat while teaching them to do everything they learn by playing the game anyways. Hats off to the creators of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood. Hats back on (and a few boo's) to the creators of Assassin's Creed 3. Expand
  53. Dec 7, 2012
    9
    As a warning: I really like every title of the series. Seem to have a penchant for climing around and stabbing people in the back. ;)
    AC3 is by far the best title up to now, as its story is simply great and dialogues are very clever. If one cares to listen, these really outshine nearly all other game dialogues I have ever heard. If you like a bit of philosophy, that is. Graphics are
    great, gameplay in the forests is good, animations are fantastic and controls are way better than before. Oh, and don't forget the voice acting.

    Only downsides: Some things a bit too tedious and it very often is much too easy, feeling like an interactive movie. And the crafting menue is needlessly complicated.

    Bottom line: One of the best games I ever played.
    Expand
  54. Dec 7, 2012
    8
    The game definitely gives a new vibe to the series. The whole franchise was starting to get incredibly boring, in fact, i only played Revelations to keep up with the storyline. Even though I would've liked them to take some time(a couple of years at least) and come out with an incredible game, I will make the most of what they did and enjoy the small, but interesting changes brought. The storyline continues to be good and the gameplay is a little more varied than before. The game in general has the same feel but if you think about it that's not really a bad thing. Expand
  55. Dec 6, 2012
    10
    Ac3 is probably the most in depth chapter yet in the series. It redefines the whole series it is intuitive and challenging to play..but is quite shorter than expected but however it masters story telling and presents the game in movie style...the opening of the game will say it...
  56. Dec 5, 2012
    2
    I've never uninstalled any open-world game before without finishing it first. AC3 will be the first. I decided I'd rather watch the ending on YouTube than suffer through the insanity of game design. My monumental disappointment stems from the realization that such an incredible game series has fallen so very far since the first and second games, including their variants. Despite being a "stealth" game, accomplishing objectives with stealth is either impossible or unrewarding. Lockpicking is a hair-pulling affair, the enemy AI is laughable, and travel (despite being reworked in a more advantageous way) is even more of an annoyance. Heaven forbid you run into the rock wall of a cliff above you and need to choose left or right. If you choose wrong, you're running ALL the way back. There's no way to climb up, the trees nearby don't go high enough, and you can't Fast Travel to a closer location to start again because Fast Travel is turned off during a quest. The only thing I love about this game is the music. An incredible score keeps up the exciting tempo. Such a waste, though. God damnit. Expand
  57. Dec 5, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game is probably best compared to going into a restuarant, purchasing the best steak available and finding that it is burnt on the outside and raw on the inside. My first review composed of a lot of swearing, but I have decided to refine it...
    I love Assasins Creed. The story, the characters, the open-world and free-running freedom and the choice to go at your own pace. The series seemed to go from strength-to-strength (with the exception of Revelations), however when I played this game, I couldn't believe at how arrogant the game is. The first 4 hours of the game, you are dictated what to do non-stop. The cut-scenes happen far too often and rather than allowing you to skip conversations during a cut-scene to speed it up, the only options you have are to watching the entire scene - which are usually incredibly drawn out and slow paced - or to skip the scene entirely. I don't like being left in the dark, but Assasins Creed 3 seems to like to test the gamer's patience with the abundantly pedantic amount of cut-scenes. It feels as if every time you are getting momentum, suddenly, a wild lengthy cut-scene appears! Also, ignore every review that addresses amazing new free-running. It's not amazing it's actually disasterous and completely unneccesary. The game has now taken away your choice as to when you want to climb/jump and when you only want to run. Now, when you run, you automatically will climb/jump. This sounds great, except for some reason, the developers decided to slow your character down when jumping/climbing to the point where I'd rather just run away from enemies instead of performing the seamless parkour that was evident in the earlier titles. Most of the time, my character tries to climb or jump onto a nearby barell/box during a chase that I wasn't even aiming towards. Next up, combat. Combat is always fun right? The developers decided to find a way to mess that up too. Your counter-attacks can now be countered as well, which is kind of ridiculous when surrounded by strong enemies who take away your health each time they counter your counter-attack. So there's no way around that but to discourage combat, which nobody wants to do. The leap-back move has been taken out, because the game would rather you time your blocks, even if it means the enemy can counter your blocks which you cannot stop. You can no longer grab enemies. The menu to select weapons has now been taken from a nice, seamless, in-game experience to a full blown menu which covers your whole screen. Which you still need to hold the button in for. Instead of an easy inventory-wheel seen in previous titles, the weapon-select menu shows the weapons in a column view, which is rather annoying and doesn't allow a "snap-select", you now have to scroll through each and every weapon to get to the one you want. Did I mention there are only 4 quick buttons? So we are now forced to use this unpleasant menu more frequently. Horses are completely useless when not being used on roads and trails because although they have no problem jumping up hills, they seem to have a problem jumping down again. It's little, irritating things like this that make me really not care about the game. It's just irritating and not a joy to play. Even the amazing visuals and life in the busy streets of 1700's New York isn't enough to distract the disgustingly obvious flaws. There are no bugs in this game, the entire game is even more flawed and unfinished than Dragon Age 2 ever was. It seems that the developers were so excited about finishing the game, they decided to distribute it before they could discover on how to make it better.

    There's just too much wrong with this game. Play it for yourself and see.
    Expand
  58. Dec 5, 2012
    9
    Amazing Experience. Connor is cool Assassins with pretty cool weapons and fighting tactics.Still not a juicy character like 'Ezio' though but lays up well to my expectations.Yes,there are lags in the game,
    -During free-running Connor may dip inside the land (surface)
    -Problems during the High-top Sync.
    Over all and Amazing game to play the tree running is superb and the Wildlife is
    simply Exquisite.

    Must Play ! M.Usman Nazir
    Expand
  59. Dec 4, 2012
    6
    This game left me with the mixed feelings. From one side we've got gorgeous, detailed word, with thoroughly made "living" characters, extraordinary level of animation (for protagonist and NPC alike), high standards of visual image. From the other side we got awful game: lame arcade gameplay, linear level design for missions, zero replayability. One thing I keep thinking while playing, that developers had so many ideas for this game - they never had time to fully complete ANY. The game also very NOT-friendly for users. There is almost no in-game tutorial, text tutorial in "animus database" is almost useless. Sometimes I've needed much more time to understand what developers want from me to complete a mission, rather than fulfilling a task itself. Worst interface (PC version) I've seen for years - another major thing, that spoiled my experience. Expand
  60. Dec 4, 2012
    8
    Just to be clear, AC2 is the best AC game ever, but take AC2 away and review this game like the game is. Ok, let's start. The game is amazing. Just like I expected it to be. The graphics are good, no glitches, no cutting edges. The combat system is just like it needs to be. To be able to take down 30 guards is amazing. I did that when i took a fort. I also love the fact that it takes place in the American revolution is fantastic. Sorry for my bad English btw. I love that you're playing as Connor as a child to begin with, I had to laugh a couple of times when i first saw it. And when you are a teenager and you are getting introduced to the hunting system i was like wow, amazing system. And that you can find chests with stuff and cash is awesome. But the thing I like the most beside the story is to take over forts and free-running. The story was really good until the ending like people says, but i haven't played through the game yet, so I will leave that out of hand. But play through the game if you like Assassin's Creed. Expand
  61. Dec 4, 2012
    4
    Great story and setting, very well told, but it contains quite a lot of bugs, and the controls can drive you really crazy at times, which is especially annoying in long missions, where you die at the end and are then placed at the start of the mission. Most missions do have checkpoints though, so it's only a few (really annoying) missions who suffer that problem.
  62. Dec 4, 2012
    8
    First let me address the things I like about the game. The fighting has improved, in that it is much more difficult; in the previous Assassin's Creed games, you could literally just hold a button and block every attack. Not in this one. There is a much wider variety of things that you need to keep in mind when battling. Still, once you are familiar with all of these things, you will never be hit and it does become a bit repetitive. The combat system still needs some serious work before I can call it perfect. Hunting is amazing. It's a great way to pass the time on the way from point A to point B. At first, when the game was introducing hunting to me I was like "Oh boy, this is just another stupid gimmick that's going to force hunting requirements on me". For the most part, hunting is completely optional, and all of the animals react differently. Some can be caught in snares, but larger animals obviously can't. Once you're done hunting you can go to the store and sell all of your pelts, fangs, claws, meat, and other animal products. It's a very satisfying feeling and the game doesn't force it upon the player in any way. If you find it fun, great. If not (I think you should reconsider), don't worry about it because you'll never have to put up with it. Climbing in trees works wonderfully. I had some concerns about the tree climbing; I thought perhaps it would be a bit clunky and wouldn't work properly. One thing I have to say I don't like about the climbing is that they took away the ability to leap up and grab a higher ledge, a trick implemented in Assassin's Creed 2 I believe. I will definitely miss doing that because it made climbing a lot faster. I also really enjoyed the naval missions, finding treasure, battling with other ships, etc. Finding Captain Kidd's treasure is the greatest side mission in Assassin's Creed so far in my opinion. And of course, the main storyline is captivating as always. I mean, come on, it's Assassin's Creed. Now I would like to address the things I don't like about the game. You can manually aim now which seems like a great idea, but it was so poorly implemented. First of all, you can't aim for the head, if you put your cursor on their head, it will auto-adjust and move to their body. Players that can aim well should be rewarded with one hit kills for aiming at vital spots. You also can't shoot freely, despite that you can aim manually. So what's the point? All it does is give you a bit of extra range (maybe 5-10 feet or so), and it auto-adjusts for you if your aim is poor. This was very disappointing for me because since the first Assassin's Creed I have been saying that you should be able to aim manually, and when it was finally implemented, I expected it to be done well. I fear that rather than perfecting the aiming system, Ubisoft may decide to scrap manual aiming altogether. Another big problem is the optional objectives. Some of them are so poorly done that if you want to get them, you'll be restarting the mission 10-20 times. Don't get me wrong, the problem isn't that the optional objectives are hard. I have 2 problems with them. Number one, they're poorly implemented. They're horribly inconvenient, they often rely on luck, and the game often does not set the player up for a fathomable way to complete the optional objective. Look at missions like the one where you have to destroy two British ships by swimming out to them and planting bombs. In that mission, they want you to kill one of the captains with an aerial assassination. But it's like they intentionally set it up so that this is horribly inconvenient to pull off. Look at the mission where you have to shoot groups of approaching enemies with the cannon. They want you to take two groups out with a single cannonball. No good player would really feel accomplished once they pulled it off anyway, because they would know that it relied almost purely on luck and not skill. Look at the final naval mission; the one where you have to destroy 2 frigates and a man-o-war by attacking their weak points. It's ridiculous, and anyone who has tried it would have to agree, unless they were either insane, or being paid by Ubisoft to just lie and say they disagree. Anyway, the second reason I don't like the optional objectives is because they limit the player. They tell you to complete the mission in a specific way, rather than letting you assess the situation and formulate your own course of action. Let us think for ourselves, that's part of the fun. Or rather, it SHOULD be. Another thing that I don't like is that the game is heavily consolized. We constantly have to pause and interrupt the action because Ubisoft refuses to utilize more hotkeys for PC players. Overall, the game is not what I wanted it to be. I expected a 10/10. You still have a lot to perfect Ubisoft, but this was definitely a step in the right direction. AND PUT MANUAL AIMING IN AC4. DON'T SCRAP IT. DO IT RIGHT. Expand
  63. Dec 3, 2012
    7
    Good gameplay, interesting new mechanics, boring storyline and characters, ending will make you go "...wat" and horrible menus for PC. Not as good as AC2.
  64. Dec 3, 2012
    5
    I couldn't get over the first frontier mission in Lexington. I didn't get to the Connor part, they killed my motivation well before that...I was so bored by the city of Boston...no side quest, no shop, no money, nothing to do outside the story. Where are the RPG elements in AC anymore ? The new fighting engine is simpler, but the weapon switching is a mess. I see this game as a dump down version, for the little kids of 15-16 who never played AC before. But for those who did played AC before, it's just another bad follow up since AC2. They just keep breaking it, further and further. When you dilute your Kool-aid too much, there is a point when it doesn't taste like kool-aid anymore...AC 3 feels just like that. Expand
  65. Dec 3, 2012
    6
    a good game but not great
    and i really like connor story but totally dislike desmond in this series
    I think in as2 series everything was perfect and i like ezio over connor as a real assasin
    but still its overall a good gaming experience...
  66. Dec 3, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. SPOILER WARNING - This game was "RUSHED". I have absolutely loved every AC game prior to this (with some exception to ACR), and the buginess of the PC version can attest to that even though the PC version was released weeks after the console versions. Questions...why is Valley Forge in the middle of Massachusetts (Go to VF in the frontier then look at your world map)? Why is George Washington portrayed as some weak imbecile? Why did they lead us to believe this would be the last game in the series when they clearly set it up for another trilogy? Ubisoft really dropped the ball on their flagship series. I wouldn't mind waiting until after 12/21/2012 for a better game. Dear AC fans, we are now officially being milked... -___-; Expand
  67. Dec 3, 2012
    1
    If you are a PC gamer avoid this consolitus like the plague. Ported straight over to the PC without ANY adustments made for a mouse/keyboard setup [The indisputably superior controls over that neanderthal thumb wiggling device]

    To the Assassin Creed 3 moron dev who said "PC gamers should use a controller when playing our game." You know where you can stick your console thumb wiggling
    device?

    Save your money and buy dishonored on the PC instead of this dumb downed console game that is nowhere NEAR as good as the previous assassin creed games, Dishonored actually showed love for the PC control setup.
    Expand
  68. Dec 2, 2012
    10
    I think the BEST assassin creed ever (I am a PC gamer so my reviews are strictly based on PC Games)... Pros. 1. In My Top 5 List for "Best Game Story of 2012" 2. Even Support Intel HD 3000 (minor lags in snow) 3. Best Combat System (B.A.C is better in hand to hand combat) 4. Desmond Face Is improved Dramatically. 5. Every Character Have There Unique Features 6. Best Colonial Environment I have Ever Seen
    7. You Will Ride Horses All The Time
    8. Soundtracks are better than brotherhood and revelation
    9. Voice Acting was spectacular.
    10. You Can even Skip clips in this version
    Cons.
    1. Very Difficult to kill wild animals
    2. Xbox Port for game pad
    3. keyboard controls are difficult to understand
    4. as AdaReview Says story not really suited for a "open world/free roaming"-game.

    i think this game is one of the best game in 2012....
    Expand
  69. Dec 2, 2012
    0
    What a complete waste of time. I actually could't play this game for more than two hours at a time, fearing my heart would give in from my frustration:-) Every aspect of this game i worse than even AC1. Let aside the battles at sea whitch was new and great. The buttons, the story, gameplay, grafics, caracters, conversations, cutcenes, I could go on and on, they all suck! Do not buy this game, and spare yourselves from a lot of pain. Alex Hutchinson name is now burned in to my brain, and i will forever shun from anything he puts his name on Expand
  70. Dec 2, 2012
    2
    Terrible. After 3 hours I can't stand to play anymore, and from the very beginning I realized this was a game to be dismissed. I've played all the others in the series, but the pacing and mission design is absolutely painful to go through. I consider myself patient, but after nothing but cutscenes and missions that say "hide in a bush, or spring up to this thing and press E" only to enjoy another 10 minutes of cutscenes is very frustrating. And also, after completing tediously boring sections of a mission that include mind-numbingly mundane eavesdropping, some bum spots you a half second before you kill him, and BAM you are a failure and must restart the entire mission.

    Boston is bland and uninspiring. Freerunning has become something of the past, the building design doesnt support fluent running and movement. This game is basically about pressing the E button when prompted.

    And WTF is with the stupid lockpicking? Broken as hell. Extremely disappointed with this game, I have no desire to continue playing only after 3 short hours of gameplay (chalk it up to about 8 hours playtime due to boring cutscenes and dumb mission design failures.)
    Expand
  71. Dec 2, 2012
    10
    This game really good about graphics also playability and action. Like a all serious. But last version so that it is given the score. And of source music is good.
  72. Dec 2, 2012
    10
    伴随着刺客信条3的到来,我终于坚定地删除了硬盘中的刺客信条前几作,刺客大师艾吉奥传奇的一生已经结束,;余烬中垂垂暮年的他再也无法神勇的战斗,最后安详并且宁静的逝于佛罗伦萨。

    虽然我怀念于艾吉奥奔跑在文艺复兴时代的潇洒身影,但刺客信条系列并没有结束,新的一作,新的主角,英国人与印第安人生下的混血儿
    Expand
  73. Dec 1, 2012
    5
    I have been eagerly waiting for this game for a year. But it seems that the game hasn't lived up to the roaring expectations. It's just another installment in the series which went wrong since Revelations. The same story as Revelations - side missions are boring and dull, nothing much to do and the story is kind of dull. And yes, one thing I found peculiar was ''WHERE THE HELL ARE THE SHOPS?". No, seriously, where were they. Also WANTED POSTERS were almost nil. And another depressing thing is the time spent in the frontier which is boring.
    The graphics are beautiful and the characters are well designed. The voice overs look extraordinary and the scenic beauty are worth a while.
    But the missions are mundane and there is nothing to do while you roam except hunting and looting the cargo.
    Please UBISOFT, have you forgotten what made Assassin's Creed a great franchise?
    Expand
  74. Dec 1, 2012
    7
    AC3 is a good and solid game, but doesn't feel quite right in the series. I felt that the game relied too much on "chase this guy and kill him" or "fight these 20 guys to kill this one guy" instead of actually using your head and sneaking in and assassinating somebody. Several of your assassination missions you actually have to sneak in past tons of guards, where if you get discovered it's an instant lose condition, and then, once you close on your target it goes to cutscene where you are discovered and have to fight all those guards anyway. The graphics were good, but I can't say the same for the new facial animation tech Ubisoft has been bragging about. It just wasn't that good, and even in cutscenes characters mouths were often not synched with the audio. The cities are small and the buildings are too spaced out to make rooftop jumping (a staple of the series and part of why the series is so much fun) not practical in most cases. I actually barely used to rooftops at all, as it was often faster and easier to use the streets. The hunting mechanic was ok, but nothing I felt like spending a lot of time with. The crafting mechanic was pointless except for the pouch upgrades and special weapons, and those are not even really necessary. The UI for the crafting was awful, annoying to navigate, and you couldn't craft more than one of any particular item at a time, which was ok for some items, but annoying for items you use a lot like glass bottles, sewing threads, etc, but since there is never a point in the game where you HAVE to craft anything, and the rewards are so insignificant there's really no reason to craft anything, the bad crafting doesn't really take away from the gameplay itself. Same goes for the trading. Sending trade convoys takes a long time, they often come under attack in the middle of the very large frontier far enough away from any fast travel points that there is no way you can get there in time to save the convoy, and even if it makes it you don't really make enough money off it to make it worth the hassle. One thing I missed that AC2, Brotherhood, and Revelations did very well was the platforming "dungeons", those were a lot of fun and really gave you a chance to play with the free-running aspect of the game. These are almost completely absent in AC3, and the few platforming missions there are are not very good and don't keep you on the edge of your seat like in previous games. Also, the game is glitchy. Daily while I was playing it killed my computer, locked it up so not even a "ctrl-alt-del" worked and I had to to a hard shut down. Luckily the game usually autosaves often enough that you start back close to where it died. Now, I spent a lot of time complaining, now I'll tell of the good parts. The wilderness is large, think the Kingdom from the first AC game and double it. The tree climbing mechanic is fun, especially in swampier areas. Too bad more of the game doesn't take place in the frontier, because you have a lot more stealth options in the trees than you do in colonial towns. I REALLY enjoyed the naval battles. I would buy a DLC that just had a lot more of the naval warfare missions. The waves look amazing, the battles are epic, and it's just a lot of fun. The Desmond storyline gets a lot more play than any other AC game, and wraps up nicely. The way they did the Desmond missions in this game makes me want even more for them to make a modern-day AC game. I like the combat a lot, and enjoyed the big battles, I just wish it would let me stealth-kill my big targets more often. It's an AC game, it plays like an AC game, expect nothing more. One last thing, Connor is a good character, though he is a bit bland. He's supposed to be bland though, an Iroquois warrior is not going to be as flashy or flamboyant as an Italian nobleman like Ezio. I liked Connor, though I actually thought his father Haytham would be a better main character. A little more Ezio-like flair and attitude. All in all, I really enjoyed the game though some aspects were frustrating. I recommend this if you are a fan of the series, but not if you are looking for anything really new and exciting, as all of the new things were annoying except for the naval combat. Expand
  75. Dec 1, 2012
    9
    Beautiful, strange. The one time 'Nothing is true, everything is possible' game has become something else. Maybe this could be applied to the multiplayer? Anyway, this game puts you on a strictly set path for the mission parts. And I mean it, jump slightly off the course in a chase scene and you de-sync (die). There is a lot of open-worldness in the frontier and many achievements to go along with that side of the game. These two aspects are practically fractured from one another.

    Multiplayer is fun, tons and tons of customization options for looks and abilities. Thankfully there is now a solid counter to the infamously op smoke bomb. You can spend real money to get stuff instead of using legitimately acquired 'animus points'. Bugs are everywhere in single player, I had a bear get stuck halfway underwater near me preventing me from looting tons of loot. I had a cannon ball get stuck in the air with its fast-moving air graphics all around it. The games you can play in bars and such are way harder than its worth to ever play them. There are no temples with associated achievements, dis-a-pointment!

    Overall quality is great with it still being very much the same game, a watered down story and a deeper open-world aspect as well as deeper multiplayer. When has this series ever not been mildly annoying? I love having to overcome something, but sometimes its just downright annoying. Worth playing if only for multiplayer. Despite some shortcomings on expectations I still have to say I love this game and got way into it this time around.
    Expand
  76. Dec 1, 2012
    7
    The single player part of the game is the best of all the AC series, the graphics are good even if sometimes the video clips are choppy, the storyline is very interesting, i say best part of the all, but lack in the open world part of the game, yes hunting is fun but limited to just few animals and only one hunting quest, attacking the rare convoys, and try to do a few tricks but get soon pretty boring once you finish the storyline, there's just not enough to do once you're out of the 2 cities. but the very bad side of the game is the multiplayer part: same as in the previous games, only different maps and characters but the sad part is that previously you were able to gain points by fighting and personalize your characters while now fighting points are useless until you are willing to pay real money to get some other coins that you can use to get some gears or perks, very disappointed by the multiplayer game, greatly reduced my score. Expand
  77. Dec 1, 2012
    4
    The 3rd work that destroyed wonderful series. From very troublesome craft systems, poor subordinates, and anything, stealth is used well and it has not become an invigorating game. There are a stealth game of the company and a big difference.
  78. Dec 1, 2012
    10
    Assassin's Creed III is one of the most anticipated games in this year and its worth to play the Connor's way.this instalment gives much more to exploring,hunting, sailing and war with enemies. the new story is well written and the historical events and characters are well placed. the game play is amazing but I disappointed with new engine it gave me very low fps in some of the parts and PC version have so many bugs but after all I am the big fan of Assassin's Creed games so I ignored and played. i think more to come in series and I am waiting for that. Expand
  79. Nov 30, 2012
    9
    This game gives me more and more new emotions with each part of the game! every chapter shows new gameplay, besides it has updated battle and acrobatic systems and updated graphic. AC3 absolutely perfect, and this is an eidos of the Assassin's Creed franchise as for me.
  80. Nov 30, 2012
    4
    they ruined ac series with this abomination. Cities are boring, street after street looks the same. amount of guards on the streets/ roofs( ??) is ridiculous . Even in the middle of forest there are 9 men patrols walking in circle guarding snow. No idea why they made soo many of them, since you can kill them without slightest problems. Fighting never been so easy, still its ridiculous how many times you have to stab opponent to actually kill him. Main character is just some random dude, not even close to being so charismatic as Ezio. Missions are uninteresting, most of people I'm helping out i would rather leave to death. This game is much worse then Revelations and thats kinda a achievement. Expand
  81. Nov 30, 2012
    3
    While this is the best looking Assassin's Creed so far, everything else is the worst and disappointing. The story missions are dull and uninspiring. The game also feels disorganized, there are side-missions that are already on the map when I haven't even meet the character associated with it. I found myself doing things I don't even know what for because I haven't been briefed. And most of the side-missions doesn't even bother to give you a reason. Just targets popping out in mini-map. 3 years to develop this? More like 3 years spent on the graphic engine and 3 weeks of rushing overworked coders on the actual game. Expand
  82. Nov 29, 2012
    5
    I have to give a 5 score to the AC3,if im not a fun of AC series i may give 0.It's terrible,really.I dont know whether the ubi did it for PC or not,see the lockpick system.All the experience gives me the fact that UBI only concerns about the results on console.
  83. Nov 29, 2012
    9
    Great story, awesome graphics. The amount of time you can spend in game is huge. Only playing the main story would take around few days and plus all the side quests and buying and selling mini games take great amount of time. In my opinion mini games are created really good. The flow of the story and the changing of scenes from 18th century to present is epic. Ending is great and the only bad thing I can say about this game is that we don't get to choose the ending, Desmond chooses what he wants. All in all, really great game! Expand
  84. Nov 28, 2012
    7
    Great gameplay, I do love naval combat. Not linear mission, confusing for beginner. Not last, What happening with the desmond face?and connor face from youngster to adult is not the same! hahaha
  85. Nov 28, 2012
    0
    This game should not have been made. The amount of bugs that exist as well as the bland storyline do not create an atmosphere that is worth seeing or playing. For players who have never played any of the previous games it will leave an empty feeling in your stomach for even attempting such a project. Another reason to never try this game is the fact that anything advertised such as the massive battles that took place during the Revolutionary War do not exist in the game. The player will only see 2 or 3 of the main battles and they mainly have you going from side to side avoiding fire or telling colonial soldiers to shoot at incoming targets. There is only one assassination during a battle, and for the most part it is the same rinse and repeat style that exist throughout the entire game. As far as graphics are concerned the game is beautiful compared to its console brethren. However, graphics alone does not make a good game. The sad part about the entire thing is the story. It makes players want to see what happens next but about half way through there is a feeling of a job. The game becomes tedious and not worth seeing after sequence 9 which is a huge shame. Expand
  86. Nov 28, 2012
    0
    **** console port. Ubisoft delayed the game three weeks behind consoles for what? The optimisation is horrible. There are barely any changable graphical options in single-player. The low FPS being experienced by many is the straw that broke the camels back. And on top of that, Ubisoft forum moderators state that there is no patch 'forthcoming' to fix issues. This is the last Ubisoft product I'll purchase. Expand
  87. Nov 28, 2012
    10
    THE BEST assassin's creed game to date... AWESOME graphics great story and magnificent game play!
    IT is the best game i have played since Skyrim... The polished combat system, the new hunting play along with the naval missions has given Assassin's Creed a really unique look in a awesome way... and not to mention the DX11 graphics is mind blowing! 10/10 goes to UBI!
  88. Nov 28, 2012
    4
    Good: Pretty good story line, not a common scenario that you would see in other games. Graphics are good. Cities look realistic, definitely captures the feel of the era. Weapons are pretty cool. Fast travel has been added in more places than just the tunnels. The money systems have been revised, it takes a little more effort to make cash now. Haytham is a very well done character and really good voice acting. The naval battles are awesome, easily the most enjoyable part of the game for me.

    Bad: Very linear, yet jumpy story. There isn't a lot of creativity involved in what you do. Combat is great if you love cinematic kill shots, not so much if you enjoy honing your skills to get better. It's basically block when the warning thing pops up and mash the mouse button. It's often hard to pick up dropped weapons while in combat. There are some higher level AI that you fight that seem to just headbutt you and reverse your blocks making you just want to shoot them to end the hand to hand combat. Crafting seems very scattered and doesn't make much sense, why am I crafting barrels again? You will probably get stuck in the crafting menu until they get it patched. Lock picking... wtf. Doesn't make any sense at all. Your horse will likely get stuck inside of things frequently, but no big deal you can just call another. Better make sure you setup your shortcut key to the horse whistle though because your equipped weapons change by themselves. You may try to call a horse and wind up shooting a patrolling redcoat in the face. You can't just blindly jump from a viewpoint because it doesn't automatically line you up with the soft haystack at the bottom, this becomes annoying when you do the tree viewpoints and can't see the ground. Remember all those amazing underground puzzles in the past AC's? Yeah, none of that here. The main character isn't very likable. He's kind of an arrogant dick head to everyone. Achilles's story doesn't really end with a bang. Seems like they just ran out of time and forgot about that part. The story outside of the Animus is just out of control. It's not immersive and mostly leaves you with more questions than answers. The thing that frustrated me the most I'd say was the movement. The cities are designed to look more realistic, but unfortunately that means that rooftops are harder to traverse. Everything is very spread out, and it's hard to stay in the air for very long. The climbing seems to have been dumbed down a bit, when you want to climb it works nicely. If you're just trying to run away on the ground you will probably end up trying to climb the food cart or tree that's vaguely close to you, causing you to be surrounded. Graphics look nice, but aren't quite optimized. I have a decent rig, but there are lots of stutters especially when entering the big cities. At the end of the game, I'm very disappointed. I'd consider this the worst game in the series. So much potential, but not properly utilized.
    Expand
  89. Nov 27, 2012
    1
    I had high hopes for this game and was really looking forward to it after AC2 and the add-ons. Unfortunately, it does not live up to any of the hype as the storyline is completely haphazard and does not explain itself. To add to that the game play is nowhere near as good as AC2 and the scenes and sequences are cut short without explaining the story well enough. I am 40% of the way through the story and I'm still not sure about how a lot of things came to happen. It doesn't explain itself like AC2 did. The story doesn't flow, it's all over the place. And could someone tell me how an old black man (not being racist here, just factual), could own a mansion in America at that time? He would have been a slave, not a home owner and even if he was freed I'm sure the population at that time would have driven him out of the area.
    There is a problem with riding horse along wilderness tracks. The horse keeps getting stuck by running into invisible walls. They also get stuck if you try to cross a river at the wrong place. They can't be backed up or turned around so you have to dismount and call the horse out.

    Apart from the terrible story line, I'd like to know why Desmond has transformed into a silver back Gorilla? It was bad enough that he completely changed for a good looking Italian guy into an uglier older guy in Revelations but he now looks like something from several thousand years ago. Why couldn't the character models from AC2 be used in AC3? Have the characters suddenly been mutated by radiation or something?

    On the whole, the graphics are acceptable but there are too many errors in game play. The sound effects are pretty good but a lot of the time they are misplaced in relation to the character/object and are too loud/soft in many instances.

    This game is a big let down after the brilliant AC2 and unfortunately, there are too many things to "patch out." I don't know what Ubi soft were thinking with this version but they have definitely lost direction in game development between AC2 and AC3. Very disappointed.
    Expand
  90. Nov 27, 2012
    10
    I hands down love this game. I really think the ending could have been a little more climactic, but it was satisfying all the same. The graphics and in depth characters to the game are additions that are unique to this sequel to the series. There are flaws and strengths to Connor that I did not find in Ezio or Altair in the preceding games. The game is ten dollars less than most new releases if you buy it digitally, and, in my opinion, is worth every penny. In the storyline alone, I got a good twenty hours out of it, and I still have a lot more content to complete. The game sparks emotions with many of the events that occur along the story. It's a fun ride throughout and there is such a variety of gameplay that will make you never want to put it down until you beat it. Expand
  91. Nov 27, 2012
    8
    Pretty good series, but not as good as the 2nd was. I missed something from it, maybe the good story. I've waited for it, but it's not as good, as I expected. Good graphics, good gameplay, but not the best story. The character of Connor is easy to forget, not like Ezio or Altair. I liked the game, but it's not the best in this series.
  92. Nov 27, 2012
    2
    I simply do not understand why people are so enthusiastic about this game. I hate games that take you by the hand and don't offer anything else besides the scripted linear path. The summary of my experience with this game comes to: "Hold E to skip cinematic" and "Follow the yellow dot to finish your goal". Extremely boring... moving on.
  93. Nov 27, 2012
    0
    It's only **** port of the console game [ps3/xbox360] , poor graphic options, poor keyboard controls, no aspect ratio 4.3 for resolution. Its good game on console's but **** game on PC.
  94. Nov 27, 2012
    5
    What could have been the best game of the year became one of the biggest disappointments I have had to play, however not everything is gray. However, there are so much talk about that i don't know where to start.

    I think I'll start with the general history and development.
    The game starts off really slow and boring with a tutorial about 4 hours teaching you basic things you probably
    already know. All that to reach the '' Memory 5'' starts to catch up. However it will still be yawn-worthy until you reach '' Memory 8''.

    The unfortunate thing is that this game ends with the same level of mediocrity as Mass Effect 3, but even worse with a final doubly pathetic, confusing and completely incoherent generating more questions than clarifying them.
    I think the ending was really bad, it seems as if the writers of this game were all in a hurry and let they let their imagination run wild, and this unforgivable disaster emerged. Another problem, they barely talk about Lucy in this game, despite working for the templars. I think what happened to her, deserved a better explanation.
    Connor is not a bad character but not be quite interesting as it was Ezio and Altair. I think Haytham Kenway should have been the main character of this game instead of Connor.

    The game is full of glitches and technical errors, some very basic and others unforgettable, the weapon menu interface does not work very well and you have to constantly re-equip what you want to use because it switches to other weapons by itself, the map is bugged and it will usually change the position you marked in the map.
    Climb a tree to make the eagle eye can be deadly because climbing is easy but once you want to go down Connor sometimes fails when trying to grab onto the branches causing the fall and died instantly.
    The horses get stuck in the ground at times, riding a horse through the woods can be very frustrating because the controls do not respond at all well.
    Also, people and horses sometimes disappear in front of you for no reason
    Sometimes trying to escape from the guards in a town can be difficult because Connor tries climbs the first thing that crosses instead of running.
    Muskets sometimes do not work or can't be grabbed. The music leaves much to be desired, the lack of Jesper Kyd is just remarkable in this release.

    The only thing that amazes is the visuals and graphic, it looks beautiful but this is not enough.
    The naval battles are entertaining, same with hunting animals, but only for a while.

    The Multiplayer was interesting until they decided to add micro-transactions, so you will always be at a disadvantage if you don't spend real money in ''Erudito Coins''. An absolute disgrace that totally kills the competivity in this game.

    This is a big shame. I am a fan of AC since its first release and it was always one of my favorite franchises but this installment damaged its name and reputation forever
    Never have I felt such sadness and anger at the same time since Mass Effect 3. And to think I spent $ 80 dollars for this.

    The hype has claimed another victim. I wish I could go back in time and prevent myself from spending this big amount of money in this mess.

    I could go on all day because there are so many more problems that i haven't mentioned.
    Not to mention that in this game i feel like an errand boy instead of an assassin.
    Like someone said in one of these reviews, this should called ''Errand's Boy Creed'' instead of ''Assassin's Creed''.
    Expand
  95. Nov 27, 2012
    8
    Assassin's Creed 3 really is a striking game all around. It's brilliant presentation of scenery and locale, it's incredible attention to history and beautiful looks, as well as the minor-but-huge fixes to the overall game mechanics, this game succeeds at finally separating itself from the Ezio-esque gameplay style for good. Assassin's Creed's overall formula for gameplay remains relatively unchanged: get presented with a well choreographed cutscene, go sneak around a bit, do some high and low profile combat, and maybe the game will even throw a cookie at you if you manage to complete the optional objectives. The difference though between this game and the two others are the fixes they made to just about everything. In Assassin's Creed 2 and below, the climbing system was revolutionary at first but quickly became frustrating. By the time Revelations rolled around, you could clearly tell that Ubisoft was trying it's best to revamp the climbing system, but now they've finally done it right. No longer will you be making awkward camera-angle constrained leaps of faith that most often result in a rather confusing and infuriating death, now instead you need only hold down the high profile button and you'll stick to whatever you land on 99.99% of the time. In addition, the combat system has been largely improved and appears much more fluid. Ubisoft diversified it's previously counter-to-win system by adding a variety of enemies that respond drastically differently to various kinds of attacks, as well as added cool cinematic-esque breaks to the combat by having the enemies form firing lines on you, and you as the player having to react accordingly. Gadgets have also diversified and have all become relatively useful, as compared to the previous games where I found myself using solely one or two. The open world setting inside of the untamed Western Frontier adds an immersion previously unknown in the Assassin's Creed series. It allows players to quite literally take a breath of fresh air as they break away from the hustling, bustling cities of Boston and New York to take a quiet stroll in nature, hop along some trees in an aesthetically pleasing manor, and hunt some animals for pelts and other sell-able goodness.

    The story during the first three sequences were a tad slow, but after the end of the third sequence I felt that it was worth the wait. Connor's story isn't necessarily as touching as Ezio's in Assassin's Creed 2, and there isn't quite as much of a connection between the player and the characters, but even despite that i found the historical aspects, the well-done voice acting and visuals drawing me in further as I progressed through the story.

    There are however a few reasons this game is not receiving as good a score as I would have liked to have given it. The few biggest things that deterred me as a PC player were the glitches and the overall unoptimized engine on which AC3 runs. Graphical anomalies, AI bugs, disappearing objects and townsfolk as well as the overall poor framerates on my rather hefty rig left me a tad unsatisfied. With a few simple patches from both Nvidia in it's drivers and Ubisoft with some minor game fixes, this could easily earn another point from me.

    Some other negative points to be noted were some of the rather pointless features this game introduces, such as the underground Free Mason navigation tunnels and the frankly overcomplicated trading system. I feel like with every Assassin's Creed game since 2, Ubisoft has been trying to force another concept down our throats: first it was the guilds and the shop-rescuing mechanics from Brotherhood, the bomb crafting feature in Revelations and a combination of the Naval fights and the new trading system in this one. While the naval battles succeed in being consistently epic, if not a bit frustrating at times, the trading and crafting system feels a bit clunky and overcomplicated. If Ubisoft had taken some steps to simplify their UI and to streamline some of the process it wouldn't be such an issue, but I found myself being deterred from using it during the core of my gameplay and mainly focused on story missions throughout.

    All in all this a very well done game and I would recommend it to veterans and newbies alike. If you don't have the patience to pace yourself and take the game slowly as it intends you to, this game may not be for you, but for those with the curiosity and the tenacity to explore this game as thoroughly as it bids you to, the experience it grants you is unparalleled.
    Expand
  96. Nov 26, 2012
    3
    This game ruined everything I used to love in the Assassin's Creed -franchise.
    (1) The characters were not exciting.
    (2) Story was not exciting.
    (3) Assassin's Creed used to be about assassinations, not charging enemies with your sword out. This game encouraged to brawling, many missions even started with enemies attacking you.
    (4) Parkour is missing. Lack of heights, building too wide
    apart. Even the greatly advertised tree jumping is more linear than all CoD -games combined.
    (5) Sum of previous 4: The game is just not that fun to play. Once I completed it, I felt no desire to go back and complete all mini missions and try for 100% game completion. Maybe if Ubisoft fixed all the hundreds of bugs, I might feel intrigued again...
    Expand
  97. Nov 26, 2012
    7
    It's a very good game. But not so good as an Assassin's Creed :/
    It's different, the others opus were more "RPG"... here the story is our primary quest.
    And there is no explanations about the game except principal storyline (yeah, 6 sequences of tutorial)
  98. Nov 25, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was so excited for the third installment of the Assassin's Creed franchise, needless to say, I was severely disappointed. Connor is the most bland character, Altair was a jerk at first, selfish ad reckless, Ezio was always a lovable character for me; but Connor is the most selfish, uninteresting ass I have ever played. I hated him. He has almost no story, and what there is is hardly interesting.
    The plot was full of holes, when he joins the brotherhood and talks to Achilles, Achilles tells him "You need to kill all of them, even your father." At no point prior to this did Connor even mention that he was the son of Hathan Kenway. The controls are awful too, the devs seem to have wanted to appeal to the casual gamers far too much and cut out more than half of the controls present in previous AC games. This makes the gameplay, especially the fighting, a constant button mashing, hack'n'slash. No strategy behind "Attack here, this one's guard is down, get him now, block this one" etc. It's just "Left Click Left Click Left Click Left Click".

    The missions as well, a lot of the missions are escort type missions with very little combat in between. The one which most recently made me rage quit the game involved me telling rebels when to shoot at the red coats, but the game strapped me to a horse who had a turn radius of a taxing Boeing 747. It was constantly jumping over fences and causing me to take nearly 4x the amount of time I would have had I been allowed to run on foot.

    All in all, I think you should buy one of the older AC games, far superior. I don't think I'll be buying AC4 if they ever release one.
    Expand
  99. Nov 25, 2012
    0
    Ok so, good stuff first. The singleplayer - awesome. I'm only on mission 3 and already drawn in - story, characters, graphics, music are top-notch. Combat controls will take a little getting used to, but not like it matters - just mash all the buttons, you'll win. Faces are butt-ugly though, not sure what happened there. I hear they pulled a mass effect with the ending, but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it.
    No, the reason this gets a 0 is the multiplayer. Now, mechanics-wise, it's way better. Having kill and stun on the same button is fantastic. Everyone having a ranged ability is also great, I'm seeing much less roofing. Recycled kill animations are pretty lame, as is smoke bomb still being in the game, but whatever.
    That is, when I can play at all. In Brotherhood, matchmaking was **** terrible, but hey, it was their first experience with that kind of multiplayer, excusable. Plus, they fixed it in Revelations and it was actually pretty efficient. Now it got worse over time, but I put that down to a dwindling player base. Here though, it's back, full retard. I got into a few games initially, which, by the way, had more lag than I've ever experienced in any video game ever, then the matchmaking just failed. Next day, tried for TWO HOURS without finding a single game, gave up, came back a third day, an hour later, still no luck. Now I've gotten into games, so it's not that there aren't enough people, it's just that it's not even trying! It'll say something like "trying to connect to session (1/7)" or (1/21) or whatever. After 3 tries, it puts me in my own session and never puts anyone else in there. If you leave and try again, it puts you in your own session right away. Do that a few times and it will say Ubisoft's servers are unavailable. Sometimes it'll just go to a blank screen (i.e. the background only, no text, music still going) and you have to alt-f4.
    God damn Ubisoft. I know you don't give a **** about the pc community, but you don't have to make it **** WORSE THAN IT ALREADY WAS!
    Collapse
  100. Nov 25, 2012
    10
    the only lack of this game is optimization especially on AMD cards. Graphics the best of the series, gameplay the best and more dinamic , elements of batman AC and some RDR airs. Amazing story.

    This is the best AC and the only one that didn't get me bored.
  101. Nov 25, 2012
    0
    Ok so, good stuff first. The singleplayer - awesome. I'm only on mission 3 and already drawn in - story, characters, graphics, music are top-notch. Combat controls will take a little getting used to, but not like it matters - just mash all the buttons, you'll win. Faces are butt-ugly though, not sure what happened there. I hear they pulled a mass effect with the ending, but I'll cross that bridge when I get to it.
    No, the reason this gets a 0 is the multiplayer. Now, mechanics-wise, it's way better. Having kill and stun on the same button is fantastic. Everyone having a ranged ability is also great, I'm seeing much less roofing. Recycled kill animations are pretty lame, as is smoke bomb still being in the game, but whatever.
    That is, when I can play at all. In Brotherhood, matchmaking was **** terrible, but hey, it was their first experience with that kind of multiplayer, excusable. Plus, they fixed it in Revelations and it was actually pretty efficient. Now it got worse over time, but I put that down to a dwindling player base. Here though, it's back, full retard. I got into a few games initially, which, by the way, had more lag than I've ever experienced in any video game ever, then the matchmaking just failed. Next day, tried for TWO HOURS without finding a single game, gave up, came back a third day, an hour later, still no luck. Now I've gotten into games, so it's not that there aren't enough people, it's just that it's not even trying! It'll say something like "trying to connect to session (1/7)" or (1/21) or whatever. After 3 tries, it puts me in my own session and never puts anyone else in there. If you leave and try again, it puts you in your own session right away. Do that a few times and it will say Ubisoft's servers are unavailable. Sometimes it'll just go to a blank screen (i.e. the background only, no text, music still going) and you have to alt-f4.
    God damn Ubisoft. I know you don't give a **** about the pc community, but you don't have to make it **** WORSE THAN IT ALREADY WAS!
    Collapse
Metascore
80

Generally favorable reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 21
  2. Negative: 1 out of 21
  1. 80
    Assassin’s Creed III proves to be, despite its promises, a rather indecisive game. It comes with so many strong elements, that it could have been the best Assassin’s Creed ever, but it fails to harmonically balance those elements. [January 2013]
  2. Jan 29, 2013
    85
    Assassin's Creed 3 offers a spectacular way to fill in the blanks in your knowledge of the American Revolution - it never holds back on scope, drama or action.
  3. Jan 23, 2013
    84
    What, no French revolution? For Europeans, birth of the United States is not really very interesting time nor environment. And after Ezio (or Haytham Kenway), Connor is bland, irritating protagonist. Game is also full of chores that add very little to the experience. [Jan 2013]