User Score
6.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1211 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 9, 2013
    8
    You know... I'm the fan of the seria but I'm still critic. And as for critic and as for fun inside me Assassin's Creed III left more strange feelings which mixed with kind of ectase and "FUUU RAGE". Multiplayer almost the same as was, but we still have little bugs, which helpfull for professionals, new COOP that doesn't change anything ( believe, it's not a thing you should buy a game forYou know... I'm the fan of the seria but I'm still critic. And as for critic and as for fun inside me Assassin's Creed III left more strange feelings which mixed with kind of ectase and "FUUU RAGE". Multiplayer almost the same as was, but we still have little bugs, which helpfull for professionals, new COOP that doesn't change anything ( believe, it's not a thing you should buy a game for ) and some new skills. Very Small amount of maps and almost all they are very bad and boring. And characters... But Abstergo Archive is very usefull - you can open new horizons from it by using skills for opening a content. Event are good part too.
    But Multiplayer it's not the MAIN part of the game. Singleplayer is very strange. Story doesn't feel like one part. Sometimes it's very boring, misunderstandable and really disgusting, but next minute you can't stop it because you're srawn in it fully and this is one of the strangely thing. New graphic, director's cutscene - yes, they cool, but why Ubisoft ruin all mechanic from previous games? Why level-design is so damned horrible for missions? And this Synchronization tasks with stupid lagging checkpoints? Rage was my sister that time...
    On the other side - naval missions, very emotional and unexpected story with some boring moments, yes they are sometimes, new hero that can't be not so popular as Altair or Ezio cause his character is crashed by scenarists and make more negative emotions in you than positive. And bugs, lags etc... They still here.
    What I'm trying to say. Assassin's Creed III - is a result of commercial style of Ubisoft. Very ambitious but in many aspects it's twisted or broken, but still it has very emotional connection with a player what wasn't previously. It has very cool animations and setting, good design and live world, where you can hunt and make money. Good village missions and very nice personalities as Ahilles and Haytem, Lee and crying Washington. It's good, but could be more better.
    Expand
  2. Jan 6, 2013
    3
    Buggiest AC game EVER!!!
    Lacks the minor missions the previous AC's had.
    What I hate most about the game it is buggy -_- just WTF Ubisoft...
    Funny thing is another Ubisoft game is buggy aswell Heroes Might and Magic VI.
  3. 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 thatWhen 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
  4. 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.
  5. 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:
    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
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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 youI 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
  9. 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,
    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
  10. 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, whereFor 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
  11. 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 firstThe 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
  12. 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 -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
  13. 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
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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'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
  17. 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
    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
  18. 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 theUbisoft'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
  19. 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 theAC3 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
  20. 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, evenAmazing 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
  21. 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 ****
  22. 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 theFirst 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
  23. 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 worldThe 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
  24. 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 crashesUbisoft 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
  25. 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 aroundSince 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
  26. 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 placeAC3 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
  27. 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 **** usMight 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
  28. 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
  29. 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 asHonestly, 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
  30. 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
    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
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]