Assassin's Creed III PC

User Score
6.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1440 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 26, 2016
    7
    Basado en la época de la guerra de independencia estadounidense. Me encantó los escenarios y el añadido de la caza al juego. Historia bastante aceptable.
  2. Feb 9, 2016
    6
    Pros
    nice action
    nice parkour
    pretty good battle in the sea
    Cons
    awful story
    end of desmond serious
    character descripton is not that great, it is bad.
  3. Feb 5, 2016
    6
    Its been 1½ years after i played Revelations, as these games really burn you out after doing one. So i was finally set to play this and have come to the conclusion that so far from AC 1,2,Bro,Rev this is absolutely the worst game in the franchise only toppled by AC1 for me.

    This game has returned to things that made the older entries and especially AC 1 a chore and bore to play. Some
    Its been 1½ years after i played Revelations, as these games really burn you out after doing one. So i was finally set to play this and have come to the conclusion that so far from AC 1,2,Bro,Rev this is absolutely the worst game in the franchise only toppled by AC1 for me.

    This game has returned to things that made the older entries and especially AC 1 a chore and bore to play.

    Some of the main things that ruins this game:

    1. Core Gameplay elements. Theyve really ruined alot of the fluid feel the great entries after AC1 had with this game. Parkour elements dont feel as responsive in the older games again, i felt like i got stuck on way too many things and areas or climbing areas i didnt want to. The city/frontier design seem to play alot into this. Fast traveling gets used alot in this game due to how bad it is to use the horse in especially the frontier area, constantly you will lose the view of the main road or get stuck at rocks and edges with it, often leaving you in horse rides that take 5 seconds or so before you have to jump off and run again. Where is New York in the main story ? Theres like 3-5 missions that takes place there and 2-3 of them are in a prison and the rest is in about 20% of the map section before its over. The most interesting looking and open city in the game is completely absent for exploration due to lack of missions, i never felt like i had to travel through the city to find a new exciting area. Instead the game take place most of the time in Boston or Boreston more like which had like the docks/harbour as the only interesting and distinctive part. The feel in general of discovering in this game is absent due to weather changes which just makes travelling more annoying due to darkness/fog etc. Thrown out the window is also the exotic feel and locations of the 4 prior games where you would see the Colloseum/Bosphorus Area/Hagia Sophia etc. and instead we get to see a bunch of damn trees and post offices/halls *ZzZ*. There was literally no amazing views/areas in this game that made you awe to be inside it or explore, dont get me started on the underground tunnels *ugh*. Mission design is also way to linear and strict, something first introduced in Brotherhood hence why i rate it below AC2 especially. The alternate objectives in this game were also really annoying and felt like they were intentionally designed to be failed so you could replay them, a cheap way kind of from the developer to force in some replay value. I found them rather too time based and frustrating to the point where they took off my attention of focusing on the main objective and suck in the misisons immersion.

    2. The collectathon aspects are back, a bunch of nonsense unfilling collectables for the sake of it.

    3. Side missions. Do these even exist in this game ? the only thing i recall is delivering a bunch of letters to nobodies and killing a random guard strolling without awareness from you apporaching at any given point ie. free kill.

    4. Puzzles. Where the hell are the puzzle elements in this game ? In the older AC games it was a joy to do the painting/mystery puzzles, climbing viewpoints were a puzzle by itself with variation. In this game you climb some random huge tree 5 times with the exact same approach and in the towns you just climb straight up to the top.

    5. Story progression. The story itself is somewhat entertaining, it has the conspirator list thing that made 2 & Brotherhood great and gave a feel of progression. However this game while it has that element fails in how it delivers that in comparison to the aforementioned 2 games. First of all it feels really disjointed with not only the dna progression but also due to the emphasis and build of the side missions which makes it a overall disjointed and unsatisfying experience. The main reason however is definitely the key characters in the game and how theyre developed, which i will mention underneath with some examples.

    6. Character development/feel. This is where AC3 ultimately fails imo from being memorable in the vain of the Ezio trilogy kind of proportions. The main character Connor is a absolute drag/primitive. The primitive thing makes sense at the beginning due to his origins, however i never got the impression that he developed throughtout the game with the story and became more "civilised" during the era. He consistently throughout the game stays as a complete absent minded savage which sees the world through the mind of a child with rash and angered decisions.

    Then we have the villains and some of the key characters. The relationship story and conenction with his father is so weakly executed. The game introduces nothing early on that should trigger strong emotions between them which would actually make the plot a hard and tearjerking experience through the sto
    Expand
  4. Dec 17, 2015
    7
    Gameplay : 8
    Graphics : 9
    Story : 8
    Sound : 8
    **********************************************************************************
    Overall : 8
  5. Oct 27, 2015
    6
    DAMN IT! i love the AC saga, but this game isn't funny like AC2 or AC2 brotherood. Honestly I feel a great confusion in the main story. I hope that blackflag is much better.
  6. Apr 23, 2015
    6
    Not as mediocre as many user reviews suggested. In my opinion it's one of the better games in the series so far.

    There is a great amount of varied content (less than Skyrim, but not far off arguably). The main story is quite decent and of a good length, but it is a bit messy at times. There are also a large amount of sidequests, but as with other games in the series, many are low-key
    Not as mediocre as many user reviews suggested. In my opinion it's one of the better games in the series so far.

    There is a great amount of varied content (less than Skyrim, but not far off arguably). The main story is quite decent and of a good length, but it is a bit messy at times. There are also a large amount of sidequests, but as with other games in the series, many are low-key and their sub-plots lack plausibility. Gameplay is standard AssCreed fare - familiar and accessible, but sometimes a bit contrived and poorly balanced. The wide variety of activities prevent things from getting too repetitive. It's almost always too easy, except when the controls and game mechanics are being a pain. Missions have optional objectives for added difficulty, which often works well, but sometimes is more annoying than anything else. Combat looks cool, but usually lacks depth and challenge. The new naval missions may lack plot, and the ships may handle more like motorboats, but these missions are fun, and a great change of scenery. The visuals and sea wave effects are also excellent. The soundtrack is good, even better than in AC-Revelations.

    So, as always, realism and historical authenticity leave much to be desired, but the game is still fun. It caters well to the mainstream, but may leave hardcore gamers a bit hungry for more challenge and immersion.

    Most environments look decent, and on a technical level the graphics are slightly superior to Skyrim (even with the HD textures DLC), but at the same time, some things still looks a bit dated due to the Xbox360's limits. Like with most console games, the open world still lacks some persistence (bodies vanishing right after you look away, people and even carts spawning or vanishing right in front of you). The detail on the main characters is excellent though. (tip - the low anti-aliasing setting looks better than the high one which makes things blurry).

    The checkpoint save system is better than many others, but can still be annoying sometimes. As with past games controls are ok, but a bit temperamental and not optimised for mouse and keyboard, of course. It is a pity you cannot have a standard FPS setup and programmable 1-9 weapon/gear hotkeys. These kind of things are to be expected with this series, and while annoying, they are not too bad, and certainly don't break the game. I have noticed a few minor bugs (the odd missing model or floating object), but otherwise the game runs very stable. Overall, porting to PC has slightly improved since AssCreed2.

    Sadly the animus combat training centre has been removed. And one more thing - why can't I gallop(sprint) my horse in town?! In AC-Brotherhood you could gallop only if you had the game installed on an SSD (yes, seriously!). I still have SSD, so WHY U NO GALLOP horsey?!?!

    Verdict: It may not be an excellent game, but it is decent, and I can easily recommend it, even if you are new to the series.
    Expand
  7. Mar 28, 2015
    5
    Another quite lackluster game in the tower-climbing simulator series. Even if the setting is quite fascinating, the main character is not up to that same standard, nor is the majority of the story. The intro was quite good though.
  8. Nov 23, 2014
    6
    Assassin's creed 3 was a revolutionary new idea to the franchise and in some cases it worked and in others it did not. One of the good things was the new naval combat which took you to many different locations while on the helm of your ship. Assassin's Creed 3 provides a new range of tools and skills to the AC games from your tomahawk, to your bow and mines you the strap onto your enemiesAssassin's creed 3 was a revolutionary new idea to the franchise and in some cases it worked and in others it did not. One of the good things was the new naval combat which took you to many different locations while on the helm of your ship. Assassin's Creed 3 provides a new range of tools and skills to the AC games from your tomahawk, to your bow and mines you the strap onto your enemies backs. However I wasn't keen on the cities which felt boring and lifeless. The story line of Assassins Creed 3 started of really strong but after sequence 7, things started to go down hill. Hathem Kenway was one of my favorite Templars in the Assassin's Creed games and I enjoyed playing as him. When Connor came along I enjoyed playing as him also. However I hated the ending and didn't like the Templar Charles Lee who you kill at the end. Hathem should have been the one you kill because 1) he is Connors father, 2) he is grand master of the Templar order, and 3) you play as him before so you have some experience of his ways. Overall I would call Assassin's Creed 3 a good game but still would prefer the old classics like AC2 and Brotherhood over this one. Expand
  9. Oct 12, 2014
    6
    This game was a very mixed experience of good and bad, and while it's not too bad in the end, it suffers from several flaws that could have easily been fixed to make it a much better game. I tried to play it for the first time about a year ago, but before even finishing the prologue sequence I got frustrated and gave up. It took me awhile to give it another try, and this time I stuck itThis game was a very mixed experience of good and bad, and while it's not too bad in the end, it suffers from several flaws that could have easily been fixed to make it a much better game. I tried to play it for the first time about a year ago, but before even finishing the prologue sequence I got frustrated and gave up. It took me awhile to give it another try, and this time I stuck it out played all the way through. Connor's story has some really good moments, especially at the end of the prologue sequence (easily one of the best moments of the whole series). However, both Connor's and Desmond's stories went through stretches where they didn't make much sense or were just boring. Worst of all, both stories' ending were pretty anticlimactic. Right when you're waiting for a big payoff (after several games and many hours of play), they just putter out. The game introduced some new features that I liked, such as having different abilities for assassin recruits, hunting game, and crafting. Unfortunately, these features failed to reach anywhere close to their full potential: once they level up some (or you recruit several) the assassin's abilities are not too helpful, as they can just kill anything anyways. Hunting is mostly used for crafting and trade, but there isn't much worth crafting after you get the few available upgrades, and money quickly becomes useless once you upgrade your ship, which you can do pretty early on. By far my favorite new aspect was the addition of naval combat missions. While quite different in nature from the traditional AC gameplay--going for all-out combat instead of stealthy kills--it was fairly well implemented and gave a welcome break from running around through endless streets and trails. One thing that this game did horribly, however, was the controls: AC games on PC have a reputation for being lazy console ports, but it seems like instead of getting better, this issue is getting worse. Instead of allowing you to take advantage of having a keyboard with more than a half dozen keys, the game wants to force you to use the same couple keys for everything, with the result that you frequently end up doing something completely different than you intended. Finally, the voice acting is pretty terrible in general, and this is especially noticeable with Connor, the protagonist, who spends the whole game sounding like he's reading his lines and just doesn't care. Overall, it's not a bad game, and it's worth playing if you're an AC fan. I just wish that Ubisoft had put more thought and effort into the game, as it had the potential to be a very good one... Expand
  10. Sep 13, 2014
    5
    I really liked the story but the game was so buggy, glitching and I had already had my fill hunting animals and doing side missions in Far Cry 3 that I didnt even touch anything of those. Game-play had new controls (an improvement to the previous games) but the magic of climbing building and stuff was lost. I was travelling with Fast-Travel whenever I could and by horse in the town causeI really liked the story but the game was so buggy, glitching and I had already had my fill hunting animals and doing side missions in Far Cry 3 that I didnt even touch anything of those. Game-play had new controls (an improvement to the previous games) but the magic of climbing building and stuff was lost. I was travelling with Fast-Travel whenever I could and by horse in the town cause of the long distances, and nowhere to go from rooftop to rooftop. Expand
  11. Sep 2, 2014
    6
    AC III is the weakest title in the series, the story is ok, but not really involving like the one in AC III.
    Connor is not exactly the best protagonist, he is a little empty and not very convincing, but it's a great game, nice graphics, good soundtrack.
    this is the first time i played an assassin's creed game and run to beat the game, without doing any side missions. AC III is a good
    AC III is the weakest title in the series, the story is ok, but not really involving like the one in AC III.
    Connor is not exactly the best protagonist, he is a little empty and not very convincing, but it's a great game, nice graphics, good soundtrack.
    this is the first time i played an assassin's creed game and run to beat the game, without doing any side missions.
    AC III is a good title but is dull and lazy, ubisoft have to do better than that to keep the franchise growing
    Expand
  12. Jun 13, 2014
    7
    this port is unoptimized for the pc with constant fps drops. storytelling is good but is highly linearized .the world is less open ended than the previous game. the plus side of the game is its naval combat .
  13. May 24, 2014
    5
    Assassin's Creed 3 is a pretty disappointing game. I find that the game lacks focus and places too much emphasis on pointless side missions, which are often tedious and without any depth or background story to them. I'm also beginning to get tired of seeing games implement collectible quests, as if developers think they're a good substitute for proper side missions (they're not).

    Not
    Assassin's Creed 3 is a pretty disappointing game. I find that the game lacks focus and places too much emphasis on pointless side missions, which are often tedious and without any depth or background story to them. I'm also beginning to get tired of seeing games implement collectible quests, as if developers think they're a good substitute for proper side missions (they're not).

    Not only has mission design been degraded, but so has the interface. Whether you're playing on KB and mouse or controller, navigating the menus is nothing short of tedious. It seems the devs have decided that flashy menus are more important than functionality. Having to navigate more sub-menus upon more sub-menus is not quick and easy. Neither is slowly scrolling through the weapon wheel in the middle of combat. Why they decided to change all this is beyond me.

    Environments are also very disappointing. I understand that devs have to abide by the generally boring architecture of 1770's America, but I've never explored an Assassin's creed city as empty, dull and full of nothing as Boston and New York (which are virtually the same). The frontier is no better. Sure it's large, but that only serves to make travelling from one point to another more boring and tedious than readng Shakespeare. I could go on about the game's flaws, but there'd be too many to list. At least the game has fairly decent visuals and a nice soundtrack, so there's that.
    Expand
  14. Apr 17, 2014
    7
    I played AC1,2, AC brotherhood and revelation in sequence without any other game in between. After 3 hours when i started playing AC 3 , i felt like somethings is missing. After finishing the game i felt like why is this story so **** and why the **** i have to play that naive "connor"??? Where are my Assassins brothers??
    But to be fair, the game mechanics and controls are improved.
    I played AC1,2, AC brotherhood and revelation in sequence without any other game in between. After 3 hours when i started playing AC 3 , i felt like somethings is missing. After finishing the game i felt like why is this story so **** and why the **** i have to play that naive "connor"??? Where are my Assassins brothers??
    But to be fair, the game mechanics and controls are improved. Graphics are ok and the most beautiful things is, you can skip ingame cutscenes now.
    Expand
  15. Apr 10, 2014
    7
    While the combat is okay and the story in the simulation is fairly interesting, the game just gets fairly difficult at times. I haven't played much of other Assassin's Creed Games, but the animal block mini games are an easy way to get killed if there's more than two or three of them. However, the naval combat is definitely my favorite part of the game, but it's ruined when I'm pulled outWhile the combat is okay and the story in the simulation is fairly interesting, the game just gets fairly difficult at times. I haven't played much of other Assassin's Creed Games, but the animal block mini games are an easy way to get killed if there's more than two or three of them. However, the naval combat is definitely my favorite part of the game, but it's ruined when I'm pulled out for no reason to listen to some boring story. If there was more Naval missions and less out of simulation story the score would've been higher. Expand
  16. Apr 5, 2014
    5
    What the hell was Ubisoft thinking when they made this game? Every game in the series thus far has been enjoyable despite their flaws, and if you were given an objective, you were usually given the means to actually do that objective. It seems that in this one, they've decided to completely forgo giving you ANY of the slightest conveniences for getting a 100% synch, MAYBE adding in aWhat the hell was Ubisoft thinking when they made this game? Every game in the series thus far has been enjoyable despite their flaws, and if you were given an objective, you were usually given the means to actually do that objective. It seems that in this one, they've decided to completely forgo giving you ANY of the slightest conveniences for getting a 100% synch, MAYBE adding in a distant haystack or something during missions that require stealth. I don't think they quite understood that difficulty also has to be fun. It seems like they'd rather have you constantly replay the same mission with poorly-placed checkpoints until you simply go insane and destroy your computer.

    Now that I've finished that little rant, on to more "important" issues with the game, like its ABSURD amount of glitches. It feels like every time Connor actually manages to shimmy and waddle to the place I want him to, I find disappearing people, things stuck in walls, floating objects, etc. It really feels like I'm playing an early beta build or something. It's just not excusable. In addition to all of this, as I've pointed out before, the already somewhat lacking stealth system found in previous games in the series has been even further reduced when you really need it. Coupled with the fact that guards now have sharper vision and alertness than eagles (Except for the times when they don't seem to see ANYTHING, which is rare), this really gets to be a frustrating problem.

    I could go on and on about how utterly flawed the game is, but I'm tired, I'm frustrated, and I'd really like to stop thinking about all of these flaws. So lets look at the positives of this game: It looks breathtakingly beautiful, and it's pretty obvious that a lot of attention to detail was given to visuals. Every environment, every animation, every creature... it all looks very believable. Until, that is, you notice that bear that got stuck in a rock and can't do anything about it but spasm.
    And... well, that's pretty much all I found enjoyable.
    Expand
  17. Mar 2, 2014
    6
    Almost a great game. But there are more than a couple of things in the game which prevent it from being as good as it should. The premise was always going to be sound. AC2 was an amazing game but AC3 does not build on it strongly enough and adds tedium and irritation to the gameplay by trying to do too much superficially. Colonial America doesn't seem as vibrant or immersive or real asAlmost a great game. But there are more than a couple of things in the game which prevent it from being as good as it should. The premise was always going to be sound. AC2 was an amazing game but AC3 does not build on it strongly enough and adds tedium and irritation to the gameplay by trying to do too much superficially. Colonial America doesn't seem as vibrant or immersive or real as AC2's Renaissance Europe. unfortunately, AC3 adds a lot of newer features to the game play which sometimes makes playing it tedious. the wandering around in the undergrounds beneath the cities just to find the fast travel points can be so frustratingly tedious it's more fun watching paint dry (at least then you can inhale the fumes ...) . The AI detection system is also sometimes wonky but more often than not, the detection rate can be frustrating (and sometimes it seems the guards also attack for no real reason even when you are no where near a restricted zone). The story-line and narrative isn't wholly terrible but it's not great either (at least no where near AC2). Unlike AC2 which gives a sense of character progression (without really engaging any RPG-like schemes - eg. ungrading armor/weapons, there isn't really a sense of character progression this time around). the crafting/economy/trading concept was interesting but mostly superficial. ultimately, it's sad that the most engaging gameplay (for me at least) in this installation of the Assassin's Creed franchise were the naval/sea battles. Expand
  18. Feb 13, 2014
    6
    The game is not bad but it's not optimized well and there are lots of bugs and stuff. Otherwise the game is fun, it has an interesting story and a lot things to do like hunting, selling stuff, crafting.
    It's not bad but if there were no bugs it would be best.
  19. Jan 23, 2014
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Assassins Creed III is a game I haven't been longing to play. The first and second game in the franchise took me by storm and fulfilled my gaming experience. This game however is a complete different story!

    Story wise this game is awesome and still stands by the Assassins Creed genre of History and Religion mixed with a little Fiction. However the game play itself is terrible terrible terrible. I even bought the game almost 2 years after release and still it's buggy as freaking hell, I dare say even worse than Fallout: New Vegas. Glitch after glitch and bug after bug. Some examples are the out of sync lip sync, cuts in the cut scenes where a lot of the dialog is lost, people vanishing in to thin air and appearing from nowhere, rag doll effect on corpses that fly away or twitch and spaz out, random people doing "acrobatics" in the middle of the street (actually worth seeing since it made me laugh out loud) and the annoying minor glitches that ruin some missions completely and just makes you so mad that you want to shove a blade in some random settler, witch is of course not possible.

    The thing that bugs me the most is a minor thing. The person you play as can't walk up stair in a normal manner. It just looks weird as hell. If I'd try it I would fall on my ass.

    Still the good things are that everything is beautiful, the landscape, graphics and the story but that can't help the terrible game play.
    Expand
  20. Dec 10, 2013
    5
    This is the first game I played from the series and it was a huge disappointment. The controls may be OK for console players I guess but on PC I felt just like watching a movie (with a bad plot) rather than playing a game. I hate simplicity at the expense of playability. That said the game graphics and physics are fine and there are few very good ideas. But the game as a whole is tooThis is the first game I played from the series and it was a huge disappointment. The controls may be OK for console players I guess but on PC I felt just like watching a movie (with a bad plot) rather than playing a game. I hate simplicity at the expense of playability. That said the game graphics and physics are fine and there are few very good ideas. But the game as a whole is too boring for me. Expand
  21. Dec 3, 2013
    6
    As Assassin's Creed fan I expected more. This is a huge downgrade from previous games. Extremely buggy and unpolished, even after multiple patches. Combat is streamlined and way too easy. One of the good things is that AC 3 looks stunning, both the combat and landscape.
    The new protagonist is dull and unlikable. The story inside the animus is mediocre but the story outside is extremely
    As Assassin's Creed fan I expected more. This is a huge downgrade from previous games. Extremely buggy and unpolished, even after multiple patches. Combat is streamlined and way too easy. One of the good things is that AC 3 looks stunning, both the combat and landscape.
    The new protagonist is dull and unlikable. The story inside the animus is mediocre but the story outside is extremely dumb and lacking. The gameplay has been dumbed down and is worse than Revelations, less smooth. I love the American setting, it's realistic and immersive but cities were not designed well, stealth is frustrating and navigating through cities quickly is a chore more often than not.
    It has many mini-games but most aren't interesting at all except maybe naval combat which was pretty damn good.
    Overall it's a huge let down and it gets only 6/10.
    Expand
  22. Nov 24, 2013
    6
    Expected a lot more from Ubisoft, in particular this one, since its the latest installment after Ezio's trilogy. The graphics won't put you down since they are above par, however the story and gameplay will. The mechanics are worth mentioning. Not too bad, but, could have been a lot better.
  23. Nov 16, 2013
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Unfortunately, this is the first Assassin's Creed game that I wasn't fully enjoying the whole time and frankly, found many passages to be boring and annoying. First of all, Haytham Kenway was an AWESOME character. Cunning, intelligent, sophisticated. Switching to that angry kid in the middle of the game was very disappointing. The story didn't make much sense to me either. Let me explain. Ezio, for example, had a motive, the people he was after killed his family. This douchebag? He just goes around killing templars that are actually doing GOOD things and haven't done anything that much wrong, helping people that are manipulating him and are the same, if not worse, than the Templars he's after. Killing his own father tops that all off. Sure, I get it, Connor is an assassin and they are Templars. But is he really that dumb that he can't see the relativity of the situation? He's helping people with certain interests kill people with different interests, but all he seems to see is "good" and "bad", not even trying to think about what he's doing and what a ridiculous little pawn he is. The idiocy of Connor really ruined the game for me.

    Lets sum this up, a beautiful living world, fun combat, countless hours of gameplay.... all ruined by having to play as a complete fool who kills random people that he shouldn't care about and doesn't even know why. I'm still giving this game a solid 6, because it did bring some innovation to the already amazing AC franchise gameplay wise (naval combat, for example), but Connor and the story were an enormous let down (and the boring linear missions).
    Expand
  24. Nov 10, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was looking for another open world game and decided to give ACIII a try. At first I really enjoyed it. Graphics are OK, it's ported to PC really good, production values are good. The story it pretty linear at first and sort of OK, so I stuck around waiting for the open world part to kick in.

    But the game didn't get better, it got worse. And fast. Why? Because there is nothing really interesting to do. Or challenging for that matter.

    Don't get me wrong the game can be hard. For example if you have to do a sneaking job and retry it until you memorize the movement of every f* guard in the vicinity. Or if you get killed for *some reason* after routinely fighting through countless enemies without a scratch.

    But for the most part it is pretty easy and you walk around doing pointless things. Collecting feathers for whatever reason. Trading beaver pelts to get money you don't really need. Killing beavers and wondering if this or Far Cry 3 has more pointless animal killing. Doing boring side missions. Doing boring main missions.

    Want an example? You obnoxious main character decides to assassinate some evil bloke and tries to find him by annoying everyone around him in some cutscenes. So walking around, cutscene.. Oh the English attack with the evil dude in command.
    Your job: ride around for 10-15 minutes and rouse some militia dudes. Exciting!
    Next: Watch a cutscene of the dudes you just roused (or whoever) get routed.
    Next: Ride to the next town on a timer. Great!
    Next: Watch a cutscene, this time being insulted by an even more annoying dude than you pc.
    Next: Defend some bridge by riding around and giving "fire" commands to some dudes. Wtf?
    Next: Watch cutscene getting explained that the evil dude you never tried to assassinate escaped and is now protected by so many soldiers that you have to.. bla bla bla.

    Why call the game Assassin's Creed anyway?

    I won't even start on side missions, which tend to be rather ludicrous. Like delivering mail. Or fighting ship battles that are usually over in under a minute.

    Once again, it is not really a bad game, it is only boring, repetetive and the story is somewhere between stupid and annoying. Same as you main character.

    *Spoiler*
    Don't get confused by the really cool character you play in the beginning, he just happens to be the plot twist. Might be one of the most disappointing feature in video game history.
    Expand
  25. Oct 28, 2013
    5
    A boring entry into a typically great series. Connor is mostly unlikeable and the story swings in all directions while Connor moves from obviously bad decision to obviously bad decision. Storyline is predictable and too much time is spent between forest and sea. Gameplay is typical but the environment is poorly developed making the mechanics feel clunky anywhere outside of the cityA boring entry into a typically great series. Connor is mostly unlikeable and the story swings in all directions while Connor moves from obviously bad decision to obviously bad decision. Storyline is predictable and too much time is spent between forest and sea. Gameplay is typical but the environment is poorly developed making the mechanics feel clunky anywhere outside of the city environments. The flash forwards back into the present with Desmond have become terrible, plain and simple. Expand
  26. Oct 22, 2013
    6
    Ok, so, first of all, this was one of the most expected games in 2012. Everyone expected incredible graphics, amazing storyline, fighting mechanics, and other worth-buying innovations. They achieved the graphics, because they are incredible. The fighting mechanics are good too. The storyline- Mehh.
    I didn't enjoyed a lot playing it. I mean, it's not that I hate it or nothing, but, I guess
    Ok, so, first of all, this was one of the most expected games in 2012. Everyone expected incredible graphics, amazing storyline, fighting mechanics, and other worth-buying innovations. They achieved the graphics, because they are incredible. The fighting mechanics are good too. The storyline- Mehh.
    I didn't enjoyed a lot playing it. I mean, it's not that I hate it or nothing, but, I guess it wasn't something out of this world. I give it a 6.
    Expand
  27. Oct 13, 2013
    5
    This game looks good and plays well. It is buggy and has it's own issues... BUT this is the game that will kill the franchise. If you like A.C. then I would think long and hard before buying this. As I said it is a good game... it isn't A.C. as you know it. I found myself not caring about the storyline and, dare I say it... getting bored with it.

    They have taken a winning game and
    This game looks good and plays well. It is buggy and has it's own issues... BUT this is the game that will kill the franchise. If you like A.C. then I would think long and hard before buying this. As I said it is a good game... it isn't A.C. as you know it. I found myself not caring about the storyline and, dare I say it... getting bored with it.

    They have taken a winning game and shoehorned it into a new game to make more money. what a shame.
    Expand
  28. Aug 30, 2013
    7
    When i played just 5 hours of this game i gave it a 9. I made a terrible mistake, this game is not that good. It has indeed a good story, and the Naval missions are the Jewel of the Crown. But the game is broken, the parkour elements are Broken, the Battles are way too simple, different weapons means nothing in this game. The best thing of the game, the naval missions, are so few in theWhen i played just 5 hours of this game i gave it a 9. I made a terrible mistake, this game is not that good. It has indeed a good story, and the Naval missions are the Jewel of the Crown. But the game is broken, the parkour elements are Broken, the Battles are way too simple, different weapons means nothing in this game. The best thing of the game, the naval missions, are so few in the story mode, that you can count in one hand's fingers. I am relieved that Blackflag's focus is on Piracy, i really hope they learn from their mistakes, Assassin's Creed is an awesome franchise. Expand
  29. Aug 26, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. so assassin creed 3 is a game based of the assassin creed franshise that is amazing so i just want to start with the gameplay its kinda hard but the more you progress through the game you figure out a great way how to doge and stuff i trust me once you know how to do that you be invinceable and now ubisoft also added naval combat that is bad-ass but enough about the gameplay onto the story its leaves of the ending of assassin creed revaltion that i wont spoil but you Desmond miles the main protaginest of the story is forced into the animus that lets him revisit the lives of his ancestor and trying to save the world dyeing from a sunray yea and in this game your revisiting colinal times yae you get to see george washington Bajemen Frankilin and your ancestor Connor Kenway but his persinalty is not very likeable and the ending is just like the worse ending ever not having a freaking choice but lets look at the envirement of course you can visit boston and new york and the frontier and every place have great texture and with the new engine anvil they able to pull off tree free running that is great and everything looks beautiful but the ending was very bad for assassin creed fans the ending was a major let down and relay big cliff hanger Expand
  30. Aug 15, 2013
    5
    This game bloody sucks, worst Assassin's Creed game and just bloody poor design overall.. The save system as with all the other is crap. In most of the missions you have to complete EVERYTHING, including the bonus synchronization tasks, in one go...in other words if you mess up just once you have to start the mission from the very beginning no matter how close you were to completing it,This game bloody sucks, worst Assassin's Creed game and just bloody poor design overall.. The save system as with all the other is crap. In most of the missions you have to complete EVERYTHING, including the bonus synchronization tasks, in one go...in other words if you mess up just once you have to start the mission from the very beginning no matter how close you were to completing it, THAT BLOWS. This game is also segmented more than the others, you keep getting cut back and forth between free roam and cut scene a lot which makes the flow disjointed and jerky. Also, the geometry and collision detection sucks as you will find yourself constantly getting stuck on the ground, or even things you're supposed to be able to climb. Horses get stuck in corners A LOT. Lots of random new game mechanics pop up at times too making gameplay feel inconsistent, things like quicktime events that all use different mechanics and that crap. As for sound and visuals and story this has all the Assassin Creed trappings except for the mechanics and gameplay..they suck. Mission save points suck, we need manual save, and the whole game interface, that animus layout interface sucks, it has ALWAYS sucked. Also, this game doesn't give you a clear idea of what you're supposed to do. Sometime you have NO idea what is supposed to be done. Other times they flash directions in the middle of the event as it's happening but it's too fast to read them so what to do when can be very confusing at times. This is a piss poor mess of bad gameplay, interface, clarity, saving. If it doesn't have to do with the visual appearance, sound, or story then it sucks. Expand
  31. Apr 14, 2013
    0
    I love the story, the characters, the world they have created of the colonies is wonderful... But it appears they have bitten off more than they can chew at ubisoft. The game play is mediocre at best, and buggy at worst. I usually aim to get completion of these games, but I found myself just barreling through to get the story, and then uninstalling once it was complete. The fact of theI love the story, the characters, the world they have created of the colonies is wonderful... But it appears they have bitten off more than they can chew at ubisoft. The game play is mediocre at best, and buggy at worst. I usually aim to get completion of these games, but I found myself just barreling through to get the story, and then uninstalling once it was complete. The fact of the matter is the bugs over ride the fun in the game and just make much of it a chore to complete. It feels as though this game could have used another 6 months in development just getting the issues worked out. Sad.
    I want to love it, but its just so...... meh.
    I can only hope ubisoft reworks their game play mechanics for the next version.
    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. PC Master (Greece)
    Feb 6, 2013
    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. Pelit (Finland)
    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]