User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1196 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    This game has amazing atmosphere and is the best one in the series in my opinion. The problem with this game for me is that the story is very boring for the first half of the game and I tried to stick it out, but the game is just ridiculously long.
  2. Jan 21, 2013
    6
    Much like The Dark Knight Rises film, I really wanted to love this game, it had the hype, the marketing and the media frenzy surrounding it to be epic on every scale. I would consider myself a hardcore AC fan, after the disappointing Revelations, I was still optimistic that Ubisoft would pull back with a superior and brilliant title to the other four entries in the franchise,Much like The Dark Knight Rises film, I really wanted to love this game, it had the hype, the marketing and the media frenzy surrounding it to be epic on every scale. I would consider myself a hardcore AC fan, after the disappointing Revelations, I was still optimistic that Ubisoft would pull back with a superior and brilliant title to the other four entries in the franchise, brilliant?Yes, superior? No, not quite.
    There was concern way back early last year when Ubisoft announced AC III, a brand new era, location, protagonist, and much larger in size to the rest, many had grown to Ezio, Italy, and the vibrant Italian cites during the Renaissance. But I for one was excited by the prospect of the Frontier, sprawling countryside, snow, trees, the lot.
    Without giving away too much, our new protagonist, Native American/British Conor Kenway, doesn't fully 'suit up' until the fifth sequence in the game.
    The story, while attempting to place our new Assassin into the historical events which led to the Revolution of the United States, feels rushed and sometimes empty compared to AC II, the characters are forgetful and bland, and I think Ubisoft may have tried just too hard to place Conor at the centre of EVERYTHING.
    Without delving too much into Desmond's story, some may have seen his finale as quite useless, but I for one am glad that closure was finally brought to his chapter, leaving room for a new idea.
    This game did simply just feel incomplete.
    But the reason it still has a high score is because it still has an excellent backstory, the combat is simplfied again but equally as excellent, the vast array of miscellaneous tasks here are brilliant, whether you're going to loot a convoy, build a homestead, or just plain old assassinations, there is plenty to do here in New York, Boston and the Frontier. Connor feels very assassin like, he's hell bent on revenge and has no problem being alone throughout his story.
    The graphics are good, but not great, the game just couldn't capture the beauty of Red Dead Redemptions sprawling countryside. I found the frontier particularly annoying, the distant hills looked extremely cartoon-like, the game was also, at several times, glitchy to the point of many items not appearing and sound being out of synch with the person speaking during cutscenses. It also still bothers me that there is still loading times between cities/countryside, get used to seeing Conor in a bright white loading screen, you're going to see plenty of it.
    It was obviously great to see another instalment this past year, but the changes simply aren't enough to justify an annual title, the improvements are there but more needs to be done to break the mould and to put up with AC II as being a breakthrough game of the generation.
    Expand
  3. Nov 24, 2012
    6
    Could have been better but this game just never would have been able to live up to the hype that was surrounding it. I personally do not think that Conner was as good as a character as Ezio was and the guy who played Conner sounded so robotic throughout the entire game. The story was pretty good but the ending was very melancholy and not what I was expecting. But, if you've been playingCould have been better but this game just never would have been able to live up to the hype that was surrounding it. I personally do not think that Conner was as good as a character as Ezio was and the guy who played Conner sounded so robotic throughout the entire game. The story was pretty good but the ending was very melancholy and not what I was expecting. But, if you've been playing the AC games like have up to this point, then your already going to give AC 3 a shot. Just temper your expectations going into this one. Expand
  4. Jan 28, 2013
    7
    Like Resident Evil 6, this game has just too many issues. Too many brick walls. Right when you're getting into it you're hit with some section which has you questioning if you even want to go on. Note: having to take out every bad guy on a boat using the exact method the developer demands, requiring endless trial and error and reloading ten times is not fun. It's a relic of the worst oldLike Resident Evil 6, this game has just too many issues. Too many brick walls. Right when you're getting into it you're hit with some section which has you questioning if you even want to go on. Note: having to take out every bad guy on a boat using the exact method the developer demands, requiring endless trial and error and reloading ten times is not fun. It's a relic of the worst old stealth games. The stealth in general is just terrible and pointless. Bad guys everywhere and you always just end up in a fight anyways so you just stop trying stealth at all. Incredible world and many amazing sections make the game good overall, but forget about the polish, just as the developers did. Expand
  5. Apr 12, 2013
    5
    with all the hype for this game, 10 minutes in, you realize it's the same game as 1 and 2. Nothing to see here people climb buildings and jumping off was fun the first time I did it in assasins creed, not much anymore. I would recommend buy if you've never played Ac, but i've played ac 1 and 2; but never got the drive to finish after an hour or so of the same old same old.
  6. Nov 20, 2013
    6
    Que decir de unas de las decepciones mas grandes de mi vida, lo anunciaron por todos sitios, publicidad y mas publicidad, para indicar lo que seria el mejor juego de la saga, hoy puedo decir que es de largo peor que el Assassins Creed 2, con eso es suficiente como para saber que Ubisoft se ha cargado una saga, es mas de lo mismo pero peor, repetitivo, sin sentido y absurdo, solo le salvaQue decir de unas de las decepciones mas grandes de mi vida, lo anunciaron por todos sitios, publicidad y mas publicidad, para indicar lo que seria el mejor juego de la saga, hoy puedo decir que es de largo peor que el Assassins Creed 2, con eso es suficiente como para saber que Ubisoft se ha cargado una saga, es mas de lo mismo pero peor, repetitivo, sin sentido y absurdo, solo le salva los graficos y el doblaje, por lo demás, es un juego mas. No lo recomiendo, me gaste 100 euros en la edicion especial y la he vendido, si, ¿porque? Porque es una verguenza como me han engañado, me he sentido estafado, ultrajado, jamás volvere a comprar un Assassins. Expand
  7. Apr 30, 2015
    7
    A great continuation of the Assassin's Creed series because of the strong visuals, gameplay and story. Though it must be said that the story gets somewhat boring towards the end, which leaves a sour taste.
  8. Jan 26, 2013
    7
    Since Assassin's Creed 3 is the most ambitious AC, It is a disappointing title. However, It has some great additions, thankfully. Parkour is improved, allowing you to climb trees and, obviously, you can still climb building. The combat, love it or hate it, is fast and fun. It is changed, but It's still great. Playing stealthy It's faster here. Hunting is a good addition, too. The navalSince Assassin's Creed 3 is the most ambitious AC, It is a disappointing title. However, It has some great additions, thankfully. Parkour is improved, allowing you to climb trees and, obviously, you can still climb building. The combat, love it or hate it, is fast and fun. It is changed, but It's still great. Playing stealthy It's faster here. Hunting is a good addition, too. The naval battles are fantastic in this game. But what Assassin's Creed 3 succeeds for, is the non-linear gameplay. Exploring is highly entertaining. The multiplayer is fun, with some unique modes. However, what's the problem that I gave it a 7. While the story is good, the main character, Connor, is dull. He is humorless and speakless, and he isn't that well-acted. The voice acting, is fine, but sometimes there's dialogue confusions. The Desmond's ending is downright terrible. The biggest problem are the f**king glitches and bugs! This game has a tons of them, which'll happen frequently. Assassin's Creed 3, is a disappointing title. Expand
  9. Dec 15, 2012
    6
    I liked brotherhood and number one, but jeese this is ridiculous. Its technically horrible and honestly probably the least interesting. I am finding everything frustrating, multiplayer is good though and probably the best part of this one in opposition to brotherhood. A horrible thing is the missions baby step you until a certain point then pull of the training wheels so quickly you haveI liked brotherhood and number one, but jeese this is ridiculous. Its technically horrible and honestly probably the least interesting. I am finding everything frustrating, multiplayer is good though and probably the best part of this one in opposition to brotherhood. A horrible thing is the missions baby step you until a certain point then pull of the training wheels so quickly you have no idea what you are doing. Mechanics with this series have been a terrible problem but in this game they are to heavy to ignore. Expand
  10. Feb 26, 2013
    7
    I believe Ubisoft did good with this one. New big world and new set of quests better controls.
    I just hated the bugs (too many bugs) even after patches.
    Comparing AC3 with Revelation I found that Revelation was better in story and graphics. While AC3 is better in controls variety of quests. Still AC Revelation beats AC3 for me. I'm an Ezio fan, so having a new assassin to master should
    I believe Ubisoft did good with this one. New big world and new set of quests better controls.
    I just hated the bugs (too many bugs) even after patches.
    Comparing AC3 with Revelation I found that Revelation was better in story and graphics. While AC3 is better in controls variety of quests. Still AC Revelation beats AC3 for me.
    I'm an Ezio fan, so having a new assassin to master should really convince me to like him/her. Conner was good but couldn't replace Ezio.
    Over all, it is recommended to play, but I don't think this one could make you an AC fan
    Expand
  11. Dec 21, 2013
    5
    ACIII is a desperate try on Ubisoft's side; a try to be new, refreshing and innovative, a try to be patriotic, heroic and meaningful. I'm not sure what the original story was, but there are so many bugs and issues (honestly, it is so far the most problematic title I have ever laid my hands on) that you can't even get to the core of it. An almost complete abandonment of the legacy of theACIII is a desperate try on Ubisoft's side; a try to be new, refreshing and innovative, a try to be patriotic, heroic and meaningful. I'm not sure what the original story was, but there are so many bugs and issues (honestly, it is so far the most problematic title I have ever laid my hands on) that you can't even get to the core of it. An almost complete abandonment of the legacy of the previous titles, ACIII is surely to make more enemies than friends. Connor has some big shoes to fill after Ezio, and fails miserably, looking more like a spoiled brat than a hero you could identify yourself with. There is a somewhat good game buried in there, but because it's trying too hard to be too many things, and fails as far as simple mechanics is concerned, you have to force yourself to find it enjoyable. Expand
  12. Jun 17, 2014
    7
    This is often considered the Worst of the series by many, though mostly because the other games are so great.
    Personally I disagree, I found Revelations a far weaker game than AC3.
    First and foremost this game is a Red Dead Redemption clone, and a decent one at that. The atmosphere is pretty similar, and with the mix of cities it feels similar enough to an Assassins Creed game to fit
    This is often considered the Worst of the series by many, though mostly because the other games are so great.
    Personally I disagree, I found Revelations a far weaker game than AC3.

    First and foremost this game is a Red Dead Redemption clone, and a decent one at that. The atmosphere is pretty similar, and with the mix of cities it feels similar enough to an Assassins Creed game to fit in.
    However this game is as loosely an Assassin's Creed game as you can get. There's no Creed, you're barely an Assassin, everything you remember from the previous games has been changed. From the controls to the Atmosphere. From the scenery, to the feel of the characters.
    At first I was unhappy about the control scheme, but it wasn't until I read a random unimportant email from the Animus that it was explained that as this is an upgraded Animus, things have been "fixed". After hours of play, the controls are pretty much an easier configuration to accomplish what you were able to before. My biggest issue with AC1 was the messy way in which the High Profile and Low Profile controls were explained, while every other Assassins Creed game beautifully eased players into the control methodology.
    The Red Dead Redemption-like atmosphere sucked me in, it was a game I liked a lot, and I found the AC3 story more engaging than the RDR 'story' (more like sparse dialog exchanges).
    The scenery was nice, however there are far too many animation and texture glitches in this game. I mean there's a lot. At one point I even saw a horse-drawn carriage flip upside down- get slowly sucked into the ground in a hellish and horrifying jerking motion, before the horses screamed and the whole thing descended beneath the ground. If that wasn't frightening enough, it suddenly reappeared and zoomed through a building, where I chased it only to fall infinitely through the ground.
    Glitches I experienced range from character arms disappearing and bodies flickering - like all the time (not just animus effects) to in-game cut scenes where giant grass-land textures collapsed in a domino fashion as the main character walked off camera (that one was right at the end of the homestead missions and spoiled any emotional draw the mission created).

    Honestly, I found the characters to be very one-dimensional, and while I didn't dislike the main characters, found that I cared little about their arch's (if you can say they had any), nor felt like I knew their personalities very well.

    The crafting system is poor, and while I hated Revelations' Bomb crafting system. At least it felt as if it served function (despite me only ever feeling like I needed to use the bombs in one mission which I was forced to use them), the crafting system in AC3 can be completely ignored, and is really poorly explained in the game, with a terrible interface.
    Function of currency is mostly unnecessary in this game, as opposed to others, and makes the game feel slightly more like the original. I found that after accumulating £10,000s I realised I never had to spend a penny until I wanted to complete the ship missions.
    Chase missions are more quick-time event than before, and the large-scale tomb raider type puzzle missions are gone.
    All Assassin Recruit/Assasination Contract stuff from the last couple of games is less centralised and less worthwhile. All guard distraction features (such as prostitutes and vigilantes have been replaced by 'rioters', however I never found a use for these as there's no one that you need to distract. Your presence will constantly go high, and bribing heralds and such will only buy you a short while before something causes another mass chase, and like the last few games, hiding spots are mostly useless once you're detected, so you just have to start killing or running.
    The ship missions are another mini game that they've tried to introduce, akin to the Assassins Defence sub-game missions, but while these are unique enough to be interesting, they're vastly underdeveloped, with most missions being completable in a couple of minutes. All the ship missions are very easy, right until you get to having to battle "man-of-war" frigates which were my only reason to ever spend money in the game, just to upgrade the weaponry of the ship.

    The history/landmark element of Assassins' Creed is pretty reduced in number 3, so aside from the main story, sense of history feels greatly diminished.

    All the Glyph/Custer puzzles and secrets from the earlier games is now gone for good, and while I enjoyed exploring the world in AC3, all sense of challenge was missing.

    The overall plot is continued quite a bit in this game, and any time spent outside the Animus is rewarded with revelations of the over-arching story. Although as before - there's no reason to exit the Animus voluntarily, so don't waste your time.

    So in conclusion, I liked AC3. I even recommend it. I just wish it felt more like an Assassin's Creed game... and had less cheap-feeling glitches.
    Expand
  13. Jan 13, 2015
    6
    Never managing to live up to the initial plot twist, AC 3 sees you (mainly) take the role of Connor during the American revolution. All the familiar ingredients are present yet somehow seem disjointed and more of a chore than ever. Connor is a far cry from the charismatic Ezio and the locations not as glorious as Rome or Venice. You've also got the continuation of Desmond's story out ofNever managing to live up to the initial plot twist, AC 3 sees you (mainly) take the role of Connor during the American revolution. All the familiar ingredients are present yet somehow seem disjointed and more of a chore than ever. Connor is a far cry from the charismatic Ezio and the locations not as glorious as Rome or Venice. You've also got the continuation of Desmond's story out of the animus with a truly terrible ending to the game. Expand
  14. Nov 24, 2012
    5
    This game is just overly long, and too boring to finish. I will be honest and say that I didn't finish the game. I beat all of the previous titles except the first one(sleep inducing). As much as Revelations really irked my soul, I had enough faith in ubisoft to redeem it, and make this franchise go out with a bang ... but they instead went out on a wimper. After 15 hours I just couldn'tThis game is just overly long, and too boring to finish. I will be honest and say that I didn't finish the game. I beat all of the previous titles except the first one(sleep inducing). As much as Revelations really irked my soul, I had enough faith in ubisoft to redeem it, and make this franchise go out with a bang ... but they instead went out on a wimper. After 15 hours I just couldn't do it anymore. First off Conner, while being the most skilled Assassin out of Ezio and Altair, has the personality that is about as interesting as a brick. The story was not engaging what so ever, and after youtubing the ending, I can say that im glad I shipped it back early. Seriously what is with this year and endings? At least Mass Effect 3 was entertaining up until it's pathetic ending. But playing a game with a boring story, boring character, repetitive game play,and a weak ending just adds up to an epic fail. The only positive that I can give is that the game is stunning. But beautiful graphics is not a game make. Sorry Ubisoft but I no longer want to know what happens next, I am no longer intrigued, because the Assassin's Creed franchise is no longer intriguing. Expand
  15. Oct 13, 2014
    6
    Not a bad game, but is a disappointment once more with a weak and pungent story-line. Game-play has improved since Revelations, and the graphics are very appealing, however this game was hyped beyond it's borders.
    6/10 - Ben Hazelden
  16. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    To me it seems as the Assassin's Creed serie has lost their charm. The serie has been going downhill ever since Revelations. Assassin's Creed III does not offer much new, the story is not as touching as the other AC games before it. It lacks drama. You don't get attached to the assassin Connor as you do with Altair and Ezio. The gameplay needs to be polished I have experienced a couple ofTo me it seems as the Assassin's Creed serie has lost their charm. The serie has been going downhill ever since Revelations. Assassin's Creed III does not offer much new, the story is not as touching as the other AC games before it. It lacks drama. You don't get attached to the assassin Connor as you do with Altair and Ezio. The gameplay needs to be polished I have experienced a couple of bugs during fighting and climbing. Expand
  17. Mar 22, 2015
    7
    The third title in the mostly critically-acclaimed Assassin’s Creed series is at best a decent experience. The game gets off to a good start with its wonderfully paced first few sequences but then drags a bit before finally setting you off as an Assassin pretty late into the game. The gameplay may be nice (particularly the stealth) but bad character detailing and overused cuss words don’tThe third title in the mostly critically-acclaimed Assassin’s Creed series is at best a decent experience. The game gets off to a good start with its wonderfully paced first few sequences but then drags a bit before finally setting you off as an Assassin pretty late into the game. The gameplay may be nice (particularly the stealth) but bad character detailing and overused cuss words don’t make this one of my favorites. Expand
  18. Nov 18, 2014
    7
    AC3 is the last chance the franchise had to reach the quality of Brotherhood once again , and it failed. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game, but it should have been released like a year later than it was: it's absolutely RIDDLED with glitches, crashes (my PS3 hang completely three or four times during critical tasks/missions), freezes and control issues. In fact they could probably haveAC3 is the last chance the franchise had to reach the quality of Brotherhood once again , and it failed. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game, but it should have been released like a year later than it was: it's absolutely RIDDLED with glitches, crashes (my PS3 hang completely three or four times during critical tasks/missions), freezes and control issues. In fact they could probably have skipped AC Revelations to work on the bugs in this one and wrap the series up with a great title, but no. Add to these the unsatisfactory ending (if you would call it an ending)...

    When I say glitches, it's either the kind of things that pull you out of the experience (like NPCs disappearing during missions, entire battles being skipped because the assassination target fell on the water (5 years and NPCs still can't swim), characters speaking in cutscenes without their mouths moving or vice versa, repetitive sounds/banter etc) or the kind of things that make you want to throw the controller at the screen (for example in one naval mission it wouldn't let me use the swivels or "brace" to avoid damage. I restarted it twice and it worked). One of the latter is the weird control issues you'll encounter when you try to walk in a straight line when there are crates to the sides: Connor would rather jump from crate to crate than just run a straight line. It'll take you a while to figure out that things are much easier if you don't press the X button (something that should have been emphasized since it contradicts with the previous games).

    But it's hard to stay mad at AC3. Cause aside from the story missions there's a ton of things to do and see in New York and Boston (or even the countryside). There's a shipload of side missions , naval missions, assassination contracts, help out poor people and tons of other stuff. Ubisoft did a great job here and did not repeat the mistake it made in Reveleations.

    As far as the plot is concerned, on the one hand AC3 has an captivating story to tell, on the other hand the main Desmond/Abstergo/End-of-the-world storyline has no satisfactory ending. Then again, it was a mess since the beginning, so perhaps that's no surprise. Oh, and I should mention that, if you're the type that never reads/watches walkthroughs on principle then you're screwed, because solving the three "power source" puzzles (you have to if you're gonna watch the final cutscenes) will probably take you a year. Another poor choice on Ubisoft's part.

    On to the graphics, my mind is blown. These are the best graphics I've ever seen in a PS3 game to date. The framerate is actually better than Revelation's. Threre are occasional freeze-ups but it only happened 6 or 7 times during gameplay.

    Overall good game, definitely worth a buy now but you won't be thrilled. It could have been better. Unfortunately I couldn't play the DLC, because the disc was imported in Asia and apparently I'd have to live there to play it. Bummer.
    Expand
  19. Mar 29, 2013
    6
    I never really felt as emerged in this game as i did with AC2,ACB and ACR since the story is dull and way too draged out to be any fun.
    All the characters in AC3 is alot more boring and forgettable than the ones from AC2 which makes the story even worse as it beacomes more of a chore than anything else.
  20. May 11, 2013
    6
    I would have originally given this game a 7/10 after having completed the main campaign....but I chose to stick around and see all that this thing has to offer. It has ALOT of story content to offer you. And there is alot to do if you want that platinum trophy. The fact that the ps3 version has exclusive missions....I didn't even know what they were ...it didnt matter.. I finished theI would have originally given this game a 7/10 after having completed the main campaign....but I chose to stick around and see all that this thing has to offer. It has ALOT of story content to offer you. And there is alot to do if you want that platinum trophy. The fact that the ps3 version has exclusive missions....I didn't even know what they were ...it didnt matter.. I finished the campaign thinking I would be able to have a fun time earning that platinum.....there was only misery. Exploring tunnels with glitchy puzzles....having to play mini-games that the ai makes perfect moves on. Having the "PLAY KING WASHINGTON BLAH LBHA BLAH" on the main menu and then having clicked on it only to discover I i would have to pay for it......disappointing. The online component.... disappointing. I can't see anyone spending money on such a thing. Getting full sync on some of the missions boils down to pure LUCK. I am not joking when I say that. I won't even grade the campaign story since this is my first entry in the series...but even I could see the obviously holes....I feel sorry for the fans. Ship combat was one of the redeeming features of this game....it was very well done and ALOT of fun. The other thing though to mention is the combat system in ac3. You willl read alot of reviews saying that it has been perfected. Honestly.....maybe it has......But it doesn't matter! The combat itself is so easy in this game...there is no challenge whatsoever....it's just mashing two buttons to auto kill every enemy over and over again. Perfected? maybe.....but it sure isn't fun to be able to take down a million redcoats without breaking a sweat. You take down entire forts yourself in minutes....waltzing through the front door. There is no incentive to use stealth in this game. The times it has you use stealth are the most frustrating things ever....you can easily kill Everything in the game...yet they force you to sneak around and .....it was a giant headache. Alot fo content here for your money......but so much is lacking here. The core of the game is just not fun. Playing for the platinum will only end in frustration. Playing for the story will end....probably badly for many fans. It's kind of weird how I could rate it as a 7/10 and then do the extra side missions and end up with a 6/10....it's a slap in the face. There's no challenge here. There's so much wasted potential. If only they made the combat a little challenging....but they put restrictions on everything in the game and it ruins what potential there is for fun. Expand
  21. Mar 29, 2013
    6
    The sad truth is that one of the most hyped games of 2012 just wasn't very good by any stretch of the imagination. Assassin's Creed III is by the far the worst entry in the series to date and its greatest achievement include making the American Revolution boring, creating a boring protagonist, having one of the worst endings of 2012, and owning some hilarious bugs. I guess I will say theThe sad truth is that one of the most hyped games of 2012 just wasn't very good by any stretch of the imagination. Assassin's Creed III is by the far the worst entry in the series to date and its greatest achievement include making the American Revolution boring, creating a boring protagonist, having one of the worst endings of 2012, and owning some hilarious bugs. I guess I will say the positive things first. Maybe I should say thing. The graphics are really great and the game actually looks beautiful. At least when you aren't slipping into holes in the geometry or clipping through walls that is. You play as Connor, or his true name Noonecares. I didn't much care for Ezio, but Connor has got to be one of the dullest personalities I have found in recent games. Despite having more character development than Ezio, he still falls short when compared to Ezio. The rest of the story somehow manages to be boring too. Many of the exciting moments take place in cutscenes and then you just walk from one cutscene to another. Sounds fun? You're right it doesn't. There's also a 6 hour tutorial. Yep! You don't even play as Connor then either! I know right?! Look just wait for this to drop to 20 dollars. If you must play you may find some enjoyment, but don't expect a godsend. A fantastic game this is not. Expand
  22. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Another year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leavesAnother year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leaves you with a feeling of accomplishment, finishing something that was boringly easy one the other hand just leaves you bored. And a game isn't supposed to bore you, causing boredom is pretty much the opposite of what a game should do.

    Or maybe you are one of those people who enjoy to cheat in multiplayer games, or usually run through single player titles in god-mode, because in that case this might be a game for you. For those who require a little challenge in order not to grow bored with a game, better look elsewhere.
    Expand
  23. Dec 31, 2012
    6
    What is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the gamesWhat is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the games liking, and most of the missions don't involve stealth but when they do it's controller- snappingly obtuse. Is it hack and slash combat? Maybe, because there are plenty enemies in one vicinity at once and jumping in there taking them all out Arkham-style is really fun, but the game wants you to be unnoticed, you know, with the big inconspicuous hood and all, so killing everyone that looks at you funny isn't the optimal solution. Is it the naval missions? No, they're awesome in their own right and I love them, but they only appear in two of the story missions. Well done! You've done a story mission! Now you have the pleasure of being able to do something absolutely **** tedious. So no, AC3 has no core mechanic and remains an unfocused and buggy game throughout. The sidequests are dull too, with the hunting not being rewarded with anything but being pretty cool despite that. Let's just take a look back to Assassin's Creed 1, where it's core mechanic was Assassinating, hence the title. It was repetitive and you spent too much time faffing about, but at least it was a game about assassinating with just a set of tools and a target so you can find your own way to take out the enemy, whatever way you would like too. Over the years, the series has added so many more useless gimmicks that the series has become completely unfocused. I guess I should give credit where credit is due, the combat system being fast, fun and intuitive, the graphics are incredible, the aforementioned naval missions are extremely engaging and I really loved them, the new Assassin's Armour is the best one yet, the overall historical accuracy being, well, historically accurate, the writing is excellent, even though the story is conveluted and barely connected to the original Assassin's Creed story-line, the menu's are really well designed, the free-running is the best I've seen in a game, even though it does get a bit too contextual at times, and it's a fresh departure from the series that takes away the scrambled **** from the previous games. However, the scrambled eggs it took away from the previous games that made them less intuitive and focused, it completely dropped the assassinating bit, so this just becomes an unfocused generic action game, whereas its predecessors were quite original at the time and remained fun whilst also being a bit too easy. This one suffers from being a bit too easy as well, I died most of the time because Connor did something stupid. For an open world sandbox game, this needs to be less contextual, because it gets on my nerves when I cant climb up a wall unless the contextual 'Climb up the wall' button shows up. This was a problem with the previous games as well, I just want to be able to run freely without needing to press the correct button at the correct time. As an Englishman, I felt uncomfortable killng my own men, but I just got used to it over time. See, this is also a problem about the game, its set in a war that's only interesting to American Patriots and to no one else. Connor brutalising Englishman because he's not wearing the same colour as them makes Connor look like the biggest monster of them all, especially when you can't exactly demonize people sodding off later on because they couldn't be bothered any more, or maybe I'm just biased. The French renaissance would of been a much more interesting setting, because in 1775 America, there aren't any big buildings to go free running on and the whole running part is a lot less fun. But at the same time in France there are heads being chopped off, the peasants vs. the Aristocracy, there's a much more believable side you can take without being gung-ho American patriot or gung-ho French patriot. Civil wars are much more interesting, oh, what about the American civil war? Where enough time has gone by for there to be cool buildings to jump around on, war is becoming industrialised, and it's the brutal slave-owning savages of the south vs. the freedom fighting civilised north, and there's a war on so there's plenty of killing for your liking, and hey, they could of had mid-19th century Connor bump fists with Lincoln. Sure, the north outnumbered the south 2:1 but it's better than the boring old redcoats. This game is overall a pretty mixed bag, and if you do consider playing it, don't go in with your expectations too high, like I did. If you go into it with the knowledge that it's an average game, you'll come out feeling satisfied. Expand
  24. Apr 5, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Personally, I thought that Assassin's Creed 3 was a disappointment. It's not bad, but it's not great either. After numerous updated and patches the game is still incredibly glitchy and the framerate drops all the time. Weird things happen at times too, there have been many times when I was incognito and the guards randomly started conflict with me. The controls can sometimes seem unresponsive but that barely happens. Now on to the good. I liked the new naval missions a lot, it was pretty fun. I didn't like that there weren't a lot of naval missions, I finished them all in no time. I also hated how in some of the naval missions you were forced to just sail to your destination even though it was very far away. The wind shifts in all different directions even when you're forced to sail a long way and it annoyed me beyond belief. I did think that the hand to hand battle was the best out of the series, though. It was a lot easier and faster than the other games, especially 1 and 2. You counter by holding the circle button when an enemy is about to attack you and then it shortly goes into slow motion for you to choose to kill the enemy, break their defense or throw them. The combat was also a lot more fun than the other games. Consequences come with too much killing, though. The notoriety is back from Assassin's Creed 2 but this time it's a lot more strict. Your notoriety goes up a lot faster than it did in Assassin's Creed 2 and wanted posters aren't on your mini map anymore, only town criers and printing presses. The town criers get rid of two levels of notoriety and the printing presses get rid of three levels of notoriety. I didn't like the story as much as I did the other games, mainly because of the ending and Connor being the new assassin. Connor is a very bland character, it's not that he's bad, but he's just bland. Ezio was a much better character. The ending to me was very dissatisfying, for both Desmond and Connor. The ending for Connor was that he just killed his main enemy in the game and he buries some amulet from the first civilization in someone's grave, then you're done as Connor. The ending for Desmond was even worse for me, after five games studying the first civilization and trying to find out a way to save the world, Desmond just dies. You see him touch some sphere to save the world and then he just drops dead on the floor, no other explanation for the story following is given. All we really know is that Desmond saved the world and just died, we don't know anything about what happened to the other characters afterwards or the effect of what Desmond truly did. Assassin's Creed 2 is one of my favorite games, I just hate to see the series go in such a negative direction. Assassin's Creed 3 is most definitely a disappointment for anyone who liked the other Assassin's Creed games like me. It just didn't live up to the expectations. Expand
  25. Nov 1, 2012
    6
    If ever there was a series with incredible highs and irritating lows, it's the Assassin's Creed series. There are parts of Connor's story that are my favorite gaming moments of the year, and parts where I wanted to put down the controller and stop playing entirely. Like all AC games, the setting and research are the takeaway win. Ever wanted to play "People's History of the United States:If ever there was a series with incredible highs and irritating lows, it's the Assassin's Creed series. There are parts of Connor's story that are my favorite gaming moments of the year, and parts where I wanted to put down the controller and stop playing entirely. Like all AC games, the setting and research are the takeaway win. Ever wanted to play "People's History of the United States: The Game" ? Then again, I'm one of those nerds that actually sits and reads all the animus database history. Seeing that history come to life is why I play these games -- the "Frontier" map in particular is just so much fun to explore, glitches aside, like Skyrim with parkour. And I'll say it, it's really nice to see native people represented as something other than cliches and stereotypes. The research on the social and political structure of the Iroquois nation pays off in droves. The story... well, here's kind of where things start to fall apart. It's very clear Ubisoft bent over backwards to show a sweeping history of the U.S., from the French Indian war through to the end of the revolution, and in order to cover all that ground it takes a loong time. If you're a detail hunter, expect to wait about 10 hours for the world to open up. I'm not even kidding, it takes that long just to don the assassin hood. Each and every new feature has a stretched out tutorial mission, from hunting to tree climbing to basic combat maneuvers (all pretty self-explanatory), as if the developers were afraid we'd miss every single detail. Speaking of details, I'm a side quest fella, and the side quests in AC are always hit or miss. In AC 3 they range from the fantastic naval warfare (which could be its own game) to popular board games of the time (I honestly don't know why I kept playing those). Then there's some truly dull stuff, like exploring underground tunnels. Whether the side quests are fun or not matters immensely, because there's almost no payoff in the actual game. Money/Assassin partners are as useless as always, so all this trading and guild micromanaging is completely pointless and honestly a waste of the gamer's time. I don't want my time wasted, developers, remember this. Most importantly, their attention to detail and putting us in documented historical moments make the main missions feel super scripted, and it's pretty jarring to suddenly be scripted in a sandbox. The main missions are the worst the series has ever offered, just from their sheer dullness and frustrating fail rate based on whether or not I do exactly what the game wants me to do. A lot of the inconsistency in this game is a clear lack of cohesion - the guys developing the homestead "Sims" game was obviously not talking to the guys writing the story, and neither were talking to the naval warfare developers, and there was some nerd in the corner scripting AI for board games and no one knew where he came from. They went hog-wild for this game, and just couldn't wring themselves in. I know they cut "Philadelphia" pretty late in development, so someone must've said "no" somewhere, but the game feels, yet again, overstuffed. There was a lot of talk about their new anvil engine, but aside from a few new movement patterns and great graphical presentation, the game feels pretty much the same. Some of it pays off, some doesn't. Was this the... ahem... "revolutionary" new game in the series we were waiting for? Absolutely not. Is there great stuff in it? Yes.. But this is a troubled game, one I was really looking forward to and enjoyed only when climbing through trees to the top of a cliff and staring down at it all from afar. Expand
  26. 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
  27. Jan 20, 2013
    5
    I do not know what to say. The graphics are amaizing. its so beautifule to look at. the thing is I did not like the story or the missions or the characters. I tried to like Conor. I realy did but I failed. There is no quiet assasin style kill here, you run in the open and EVERYONE can sense your present and ready for the killing even if you are hidding behind a wall, or god forbids, ON THEI do not know what to say. The graphics are amaizing. its so beautifule to look at. the thing is I did not like the story or the missions or the characters. I tried to like Conor. I realy did but I failed. There is no quiet assasin style kill here, you run in the open and EVERYONE can sense your present and ready for the killing even if you are hidding behind a wall, or god forbids, ON THE ROOFS! no running on top of roofs, they are ready for you, They'll climp up for you to force you down! and then run after you some more while shooting at you and..oh god! what happened?!! I thought him being native and all will be the master of disguise and stealth killing..but no..I just did not like this one. Expand
  28. Apr 6, 2013
    7
    There is no doubt about it. This game has supremely high-production values, especially when it comes to the story or the graphical fidelity. In the sense of gameplay, not so much. See the developers stuck so heavily to the script most of what gameplay consists of is mundane story missions where you tail a fixed target. It's repetitive and boring, providing no innovation at all. The combatThere is no doubt about it. This game has supremely high-production values, especially when it comes to the story or the graphical fidelity. In the sense of gameplay, not so much. See the developers stuck so heavily to the script most of what gameplay consists of is mundane story missions where you tail a fixed target. It's repetitive and boring, providing no innovation at all. The combat is still fluid, albeit easy but it's nice to see how inventive they were with some of the ways you can kill your enemies. The animations and the game world is breathtaking, with the mountain regions being implemented in the game for a new, dynamic free-running system. This for the most part, works very well but it's a shame you're discouraged to explore the rooftops so heavily with the amount of guards that are conveniently up there. The side-missions and other activities lack any real engagement or reason to care about them, they just feel tacked-on. The naval missions though are a welcome addition to the series and fit the era the game is depicted in. The story and voice-acting are good but the new protagonist lacks any personality, he just feels like some guy. Oh, and don't even get me started on that s***** ass ending which is obviously intended as sequel bait. Lastly, the 100% synchronization is supposed to be a set of additional objectives in a mission but the missions are so linear and centred around the story anyway that you probably won't notice or care about it. Overall, it's a good game but I feel like the series is spiralling downward more and more, going onto the path of the endless Call of Duty sequels. Expand
  29. May 3, 2013
    6
    AC III is a very disappoint game. Yes it has better graphics and cinematics but that it's not what makes a game great. The story feels rushed and Connor reminds me of Kristen Stewart...the only thing that I saw Connor show was anger, and even that sound like fake anger. The stealth is very difficult to pull out in this game, running around in the roof tops isn't fun anymore, the guardsAC III is a very disappoint game. Yes it has better graphics and cinematics but that it's not what makes a game great. The story feels rushed and Connor reminds me of Kristen Stewart...the only thing that I saw Connor show was anger, and even that sound like fake anger. The stealth is very difficult to pull out in this game, running around in the roof tops isn't fun anymore, the guards spot you so easly that makes you don't want to walk in the rooftops...the Frontier section is amazing with the animals and been hable to explore but some glitches makes the experience a bit hard to enjoy. The naval missons are amazing but honestly they became a bit repetitive and not has enjoyable. The combat system feels very slow. Expand
  30. Nov 13, 2012
    6
    ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW--- could have been epic, but instead let down by a dull story, repetitive gameplay and sadly ( a first in the franchise) boredom! Looks fantastic and HAD SO MUCH PROMISE but in fact comes out dry, limp and really unrewarding. Bugs yes, travelling lots, terrible characterisation- indeed, but none of that makes it a bad game; it's the promise of greatness & subsequentALL YOU NEED TO KNOW--- could have been epic, but instead let down by a dull story, repetitive gameplay and sadly ( a first in the franchise) boredom! Looks fantastic and HAD SO MUCH PROMISE but in fact comes out dry, limp and really unrewarding. Bugs yes, travelling lots, terrible characterisation- indeed, but none of that makes it a bad game; it's the promise of greatness & subsequent mediocrity that is the real bummer here!! What a missed opportunity, what a shame. My last AC purchase - and if you don't agree play red dead redemption for an hour- it's superior in every way when this Ac could have been the icing on the cake. Oh for shame ubisoft, a huge drop kick given the excellent premise and buildup. By the way I had this game 2 days before the rushed reviews came ou and mine is 100 per cent complete full synch. I speak from experience. Sad times Expand
Metascore
85

Generally favorable reviews - based on 41 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 41
  2. Negative: 0 out of 41
  1. Mar 6, 2013
    60
    The Assassin’s Creed formula of fighting and parkour is starting to get old, even with the ability to climb trees now. Maybe it’s the repetitiveness of the series, or maybe it’s just less interesting to toss crates of tea into the harbour than to hunt and kill corrupt bishops.
  2. Dec 3, 2012
    88
    This review is getting long-winded so let's wrap it up. Assassin's Creed III is the biggest and most ambitious Assassin's Creed title yet, but a few missteps leaves it short of being the series' best. In spite of my excessive nitpicking, Assassin's Creed III is great game and a must-have for any Assassin's fan.
  3. Nov 26, 2012
    88
    A great continuation of the Assassin's Creed series because of the strong visuals, gameplay and story. Though it must be said that the story gets somewhat boring towards the end, which leaves a sour taste.