User Score
6.8 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 851 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Dec 7, 2012
    7
    Assassin's Creed III is a disappointing new instalment in the Assassin's Creed series; though having a good story, it is ruined by bland graphics, not so likeable characters, plenty of bugs and a hit and miss ending. This is one of the weakest instalments, but better than Revelations.
  2. May 2, 2013
    9
    assassin's creed 3 is relatively awesome. it has awesome characters connor being one.. the only problem is connor is a bit arragent.. which is bad from the main character.. I hope they explain why in the next installment.. and if they don't well thats just plain lazy.. the game was the end of desmonds trilogy and desmond is gone.. ok? wtf was this about? the end of the world? well.. umm did it happen no? the graphics are improved HEAPS! and the ship battles are the main thing to look forward to into this game.. I give this game a 9/10 Expand
  3. Dec 19, 2012
    6
    The Assassin's Creed series was in desperate need of a change of setting and protagonist. It got one, but the replacements are lackluster. The impressive architecture of Rome/Constantinople has been replaced with 2 story brick houses and the occasional tall tree. As far as storyline, it's as ham-fisted as ever. You're along for the ride at literally every major Revolutionary event but have no real reason to be, all the while being preached at by various characters. Connor, being half-Native American, could have been a really interesting character, but after the introductory sequences his heritage is almost never brought up again. Controls are very awkward, and I found myself getting stuck on small objects and corners, and if I was on a horse is was almost faster if I just went on foot. Combat is simplistic enough that you could probably play it on an old NES controller, which might be a good thing considering how freaking many guards there are walking around. Seriously, it's about a 1/1 ratio of civilians to guards in major towns. The only real bright spots I found were the naval battles (I enjoyed them enough that I could almost see an expanded version of them being a standalone game) and the character of Haytham. Wading through the snow during winter was also a nice touch. Expand
  4. Dec 29, 2012
    10
    Despite its many many many flaws, I cant force myself to give this game less than a 10. What I loved about Red Dead Redemption and other ACs is here with beautiful graphics, sounds, soundtrack, voiceover, story, side missions.... I absolutely love the american revolution era as Im not american (not even british or any other english nation) and love to see how the biggest country of today raised to its glory. The game begins very slowly which is very rare in games (looking at you, CoD) and it takes 4 out of 12 sequences of the game to get to play as the games protagonist Connor. Or the protagonist might also be Desmond. The naval missions are awesome. Then most of the side missions (Homestead missions and Fort takeovers) are also very good and I focused them more than the story missions just to know what is going on at my Homestead. It can also get very rewarding. For example collecting the trinkets to find the treasure of captain Kidd was well worth the time. To the cons... as I said at the beginning, there are MANY. Simple points might be the best to express them.
    1)100% sync gameplay is a pain in the ass and the game bugs often ruin it
    2)Game bugs
    3)Ending
    4)Controls often act differently than you want them to
    5)GAME BUGS.

    MANY BUGS! While none of them were game breaking, there are simply WAY to many. Which is a real shame. The multiplayer is awesome but very similiar to previous ACs. Personally, I found AC3 to be the best release this year, although I understand the big ugly yellow seven above the user reviews. The ending was more of what we got to know from Ubisoft. AC is their honey and they want to make you buy another AC. This is how I understand it.
    Expand
  5. Dec 30, 2012
    8
    Assassins Creed delivers in a way that Call of Duty cannot. Open world opportunities, stealth action, a Single Player mode worth playing, a cinematic theme, and incredible gameplay.
  6. Mar 7, 2013
    8
    Assassins Creed 3 feels like a remarkable step forward for the AC franchise. The Countryside blooms with greenery and rural pastures. The cities are bustling and there are some remarkable sights to behold, especially in the new naval battles. The combat is much improved, with advanced AI, demanding strategic fighting acumen to fend off. Unfortunately despite the brilliance, AC3 has the bad habit of giving you excellent missions, with grandeur aesthetics and a palpable sense of scale, right before giving you tedious missions where one misstep triggers an instant failure. Connor is also an emotionless bore, really anchoring the sense of attachment which made Ezio so lovable and endearing. Assassins Creed 3 is a great sequel in a franchise filled with great games. But this isn't the AC we expected, for every brilliant mission comes a handful of truly rote and unfair ones. Luckily AC3 at its best provide some of the greatest moments in the franchise. Expand
  7. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Assassin's Creed III takes everything that worked well in previous titles, sprinkled in a touch of Red Dead Redemption, tweaked thecombat to be as smooth as Batman: Arkham City, borrowed the cinematic and character development of Uncharted 2, and polished it all off to be one of, if not the very best, game of 2012.
  8. Nov 9, 2012
    7
    Good performance by Ubisoft, but was not worth all the hype it received. The game is very fun, but eventually, some missions get boring and the game is full of glitches and bugs. The game starts off slow, but gets good overtime, but has a near-impossible last mission. Still a buy in the AC series.
  9. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Look, this game isn't really a 10 but i gave it that score to counter all those negative scores from butthurt trolls that are mad because this game is 15x times better than thier favourite generic shooter, CoD.
  10. Jan 16, 2013
    8
    This is one of two retail games I looked forward to through out 2012, and the only one I got and played at launch. The story holds your interest up until the end where it slowed to a dull and or aggravating finish both inside the animus and outside it. While the final acts may be really slow, the acts leading up to it are very well made. The new fighting control feels fresh and requires more thought than previous Creed entries to survive. 100%ing this game is tedious. Having to travel to every bar, shop, several side missions yourself is just annoying.

    As or the multiplayer it held my interest long enough to get all the achievements but that is about it really. Wolfpack is fun but it gets boring quickly like any other horde mode.
    Expand
  11. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    People need to stop trolling, it's really makes me sad seeing trolls giving this game 0's without even stating one valid reason, this game isn't perfect but it's the best this year, way better than ohter rushed games that surprisngly, got better scores than this.
  12. Mar 14, 2013
    5
    There's a departure here from the classic Assassin's Creed format. The graphic are slightly improved, the implausible Sci-fi plot remains, and the combat is great. But this like Brotherhood feels more like an excuse to milk the franchise by acting a period piece that is intriguing than a progression of the overall story. Let's not forget that Desmond is the real main character. Yet I'm left feeling that over the course of 4-5 games, Desmond has made no progress as a character. Nor have his supporting players. The main characters suffer for the sake of an ancestor's story. It's becoming frustrating especially since the end is so near." I just keep wondering how many more games they can squeeze out of this franchise. Finally, as I've noted in multiple reviews before, the ending of a game or movie or any story is crucial to how it is perceived. If the ending is bad, that's the last you'll remember of the game. Not just the story was flawed, but the broken final mission as well. As a result, I was left with a "this is it?" moment that was just annoying. Expand
  13. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    I've got 13 hours of playing the game and my thoughts are a complete mixed bag. I WANT to love this game because I enjoyed prior AC titles AND I'm a huge U.S. history geek. Thankfully, I can say it's not the era of the game that disappoints me as they've done a good job of making it feel as though you're in the colonies and 18th century cities. My disappointment stems, almost entirely, from gameplay changes. |||| First, combat feels like it's taken two steps backwards. Trying to target is an exercise in frustration. The same can be said for melee combat itself where often I find I end up button mashing - something I NEVER did in previous AC games - because the timing of counters, counter grabs, and attacks are WAY off. Ranged combat is just painful in part because of the weapons of the era (yay muzzle loaded rifle reload times!) and because the ranged weapon options are SEVERELY lacking in this iteration. |||| Second, the number and rapidity of cutscenes is ridiculous. Even my wife, who is decidedly a non-gamer, has noticed this fact, commenting on more than one occasion that she thought I was watching a movie, not playing a game. And this is someone who has seen me play damn near every Final Fantasy game for the last 15 years. There are entirely too many portions of the game, thus far, where you run from one "mission" (which was a cutscene) to another mission only to find out that, too, is a cutscene. |||| Third: New Engine equals new fun things (such as ships) but LOTS of bugs. I have died about a dozen times in Frontier because Connor has fallen through a texture - usually by a rock or tree - and then free falls for several minutes before the game considers it a "desync". Climbing objects is also riddled with bugs, especially in urban environments where it's possible for the game to glitch and not recognize a ledge as climbable in one instance but then work fine a few minutes later. |||| Fourth, and finally, the writing is terribly predictable and trite. For a game that forces you into so many cutscenes, it's sad that most of them are yawn worthy and uninspiring. ||| If I could give it a 6.5, I would, but rounding up to 7 would be too high, IMO. If you're a diehard AC fan, you'll be disappointed in the "downgrades" to the combat and Animus systems. If you're a diehard Revolutionary War geek, you'll be disappointed because (despite the ads) that only makes up a small part of the game. If you're a gamer who appreciates a good story, you'll be disappointed by the story and presentation of AC3. It's probably worth a rental, but maybe not a purchase - and certainly NOT worth a purchase PLUS the "season's pass". Expand
  14. Nov 8, 2012
    7
    what seemed to be the best game of the franchise turned into the worst of the main trilogy. The game was clearly rushed to be released during the holiday season, and it has so many glitches and bugs it's not even fun. Even though the story is pretty good and good action, the gameplay and combat are both a lot more fluid... the setting fails, buildings are only about 2 stories tall, they are like 500 meters apart from each other, which will have you running/on a horse/parkouring more than the actual length of the sequences.

    The biggest complain is the glitches to be honest, this game has the best soundtrack (tied with Brotherhood) but it has more glitches than the first one, and this is not acceptable, not in 2012
    Expand
  15. Jan 15, 2013
    6
    I really expected this game to be a lot better than it was, and not in the over hype way, but in the sense that it looked like a solid game and fundamentally it was going to build off of it's predecessors in an exciting setting. Welp, it turns out that in building on it's predecessors it managed to throw every possible pointless side mission into the game without regards for how it fit in. This is really raw analogy but it felt as though someone dipped their game making paintbrush into a bucket of game idea paint, and just splattered it on a canvas. That may sound like a gross exaggeration but if you look at everything besides the story line it really does feel that way. You literally have to do none of the side missions and for the most part the game does a terrible job of informing you on the various systems mechanics. There is crafting and trading, sailing, liberation, hunting, guilds, postal missions, view points, gambling, and a bunch of other stuff, that if you ignored it would make little to no difference on your game it seems. I hate to knock this game because it really did have some cool moments but there were a lot of other points where I was just banging my head and asking "why!?". I'm happy that I finished the game but I really felt like it was a push for me to take interest in this one, especially after having played 2, brotherhood, and revelations within a 3 week period. I think a lot of the time I felt overwhelmed and not in the good exploratory sense, but in the sense that completing this game (story plus extras), just seemed like a task that I had no interest in taking on. To contextualize, in past games I never collected the feathers, but I always bought everything I could and upgraded everything and completed all the side missions. In this game it felt like there was too much that I just felt like the incentive did not exist for me continue playing past the story. It is a shame because I thought this one would surprise me but unfortunately it was a huge let down. Expand
  16. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    Expected much more than I got. It really is unfortunate that they'd incorporate such a bad ending in an attempt to milk the series in the future. Don't expect anything groundbreaking.
  17. Oct 30, 2012
    0
    A series ends brethren! That's it, no more Assassin's Creed in future. I cannot go into details without spoiling, so I just say they pulled off Mass Effect 3 with this game. What a shame to see a legacy end like this. At least the story of Connor was good, whilst the story of Desmond was not. Funny how Lucy was never mentioned, looks like had no clue how to make a satisfying ending.
  18. Mar 4, 2013
    8
    Before I played this game, I had never played any other games in the Assassin's Creed series. After playing this game however, I can safely say that it really got me into the series. I had a really fun time with ACIII. I really enjoyed this game's unique Revolutionary War setting, cast of characters, gameplay and graphics. The gameplay is both a beat'em up and a stealth game, much like Batman Arkham City. Only this time, you have a little more freedom on how you want to approach things. In other words, you can be stealthy, or you can beat people up instead. I enjoyed this, but at the same time, it made me wish I was playing Arkham City again. Arkham City was a little less complex like this, which I like about it. That's not to say it isn't fun to choose your approach, it was just easier in Arkham City. Another problem with the gameplay is that there are several really funny glitches that keep happening. I have experienced British soldiers flopping around as they die as if they have no bone left in their bodies, and a bizarre game crashing glitch that causes the area you are walking into to not load properly, have the camera fixed in one spot, and having the mini-map being the only thing on the screen that is moving. Along with this, there is also a glitch where during a naval battle, the ship you're on does a somersault, and defies all forms of physics and gravity by not damaging the ship, or throwing off any crew members. The graphics are awesome too. They look more realistic than just about any other video game I have ever seen. I think Batman Arkham City looks much more realistic, but it does not get much more realistic than this. As for the story, don't get me started. The story of this game just sucks if you have not played any of the prior games in the franchise. However, I think that even if you have played the prior games, the rest of the story would still suck. The story set in colonial times is kind of a Star Wars rip-off. The main character learns that one of the main villains of the story is his father, has a wise mentor, and had everything he once knew taken away from him, which made him train to become an assassin. Does that. Sound. Familiar?!? Along with this, the story that takes place in the present, should not even have to be there. No one even cares that Desmond Miles is in the game. Along with this, the ending of this story (which is also the ending of the entire game overall) is just horrible. It ends with Desmond having to make a choice on whether or not he should do something, However, you don't even get to make the choice for him, and along with that, the ending is just so abrupt. Overall, I have been able to overlook this game's flaws, and can safely say that it is a great game. However, at the same time, the game just feels a little bit unfinished and rushed, as signified by the ending and the glitches. It is a great game if you just want to beat people up, but if you want something better, you might be better off just reinserting the disk for Batman Arkham City into your Xbox 360. Expand
  19. Nov 23, 2012
    8
    There is no denying Ubisoft tries to deliver new things to their fans and strive to be ambitious. However here what hold AC3 back from the previous 4 games is the ending. It is rushed, anticlimatic and unfulfilling. I really wanted to love this game, but it is just too underwhelming to really become memorized.
  20. Nov 1, 2012
    10
    Assassins Creed 2 was the series highlight that is no longer true with the release of Assassins Creed 3. The series returns with a new setting, a new character and revamped movement and combat system. This game is set in the time of the American revolution. Your character is the half British and half Native American assassin named Connor. In the beginning you play as Connor's father but I'll try to keep this as spoiler free as possible. Talking about the start the first 3 hours you play as Connor are very narrow and closed. You are funneled down a narrowed path and not given any freedom. But when you are put into the huge open world you really notice the attention to detail and the amount of things you have to do. You can hunt, you can assist strangers, you can just free run through the trees. The revamped combat and movement systems help this experience. The combat has turned into more like an Arkham city experience with a heavy counter focus. This means your using maybe 3 buttons max at any one time. The movement system is even simpler, you hold 1 button to jump, run and vault. It allows you to move more fluidly and you just feel more comfortable holding 1 button. The animation and graphics also must be congratulated. The eyes especially they are just amazing and stare a at you and follow you. In conclusion the Assassins Creed series returns triumphantly with it's best entry so far 10/10 Expand
  21. Nov 1, 2012
    9
    This is the Assassin's Creed we've all been waiting for. Incredible and focused storytelling, wonderful and engrossing new environments to explore, refined and visceral combat; ACIII is ambitious, huge, and very entertaining. The only thing holding this incredible experience back are the technical problems. I think that, with ACIII, we've finally seen what the Xbox can push out. ACIII is incredible graphically, but the poor draw distance, multitude of bugs, strange/annoying glitches and the fact that some mechanics just don't work is just inexcusable, especially coming from such a high pedigree. It's a shame that after four big console releases the AC team refuses to add that layer of polish that would have made ACIII no doubt one of the best games of all time. Not that it isn't a good game, AC3 is filled with content to explore, secrets to uncover, and story to be unraveled at an expert pace. AC3 is a rough diamond. Expand
  22. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    Assassin's Creed III is a very fun at times predictable game. The graphics are great the storyline is decent but the thing about AC3 that troubles me is the glitches and the ending but I'm not going to talk about that because of Spoiling it for someone, the other thing about it is the stealth mode where its sometimes rediciouls than anyone would spot an assassin in the grass but overall I will say that AC3 is a good game and one of the best this year. Expand
  23. Dec 3, 2012
    8
    Assassin's Creed III is a thoroughly enjoyable game. I really enjoyed the American Revolution setting and the brand new game engine performs fantastically. The new series assassin, Connor has a very brutal and fast paced combat style utilizing a host of new weapons. A favorite of mine is the rope dart which can wrap around the necks of enemies allowing you to pull them down or even hang them from a tree. This title's world is also far more expansive and gives you more side missions and activities. Players get a Homestead now instead of a castle or fort and like in previous games it develops as the game progresses. The story starts off very slow but picks up with a nice little twist to get you engaged. It's very fun to participate in key events of the American Revolution including events like the Battle of Bunker Hill. Lamentably the story slows down at the end and the ending leaves a little to be desired. Overall this game is fantastic and should definitely be played! Expand
  24. Nov 8, 2012
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. First off, let me just say, there are spoilers, minor, but still. Now, I really thought this game was the best game that was ever created graphically. The scenery of the game was purely beautiful. The graphics were basically flawless! I hesitated playing when I picked it up on the day it was released. The story was really slow and boring. Playing as Haythem was new because he was a Templar, It was the first time in the franchise you could play as a Templar. It also sparked a plot twist, and that was, one of Desmond's ancestor's weren't an assassin. Later on, the story was making little sense because if he was a Templar why was he doing all the good an assassin does? It made little sense, but other than that and a few other glitches, I enjoyed the game. The ending was very stupid too. There will be an Assassins Creed 4, I just don't get how it'll get done. But, if you're on the fence of buying this game, make sure you've played the 4 others first before playing this one. But if you have played all the others, and you're wondering if you should get this, I suggest you should. Really great game, with TONS of stuff to do and a HUGE map to travel after you've beaten the main story mode. Expand
  25. Feb 7, 2013
    8
    This was my first Assassin's Creed game and I absolutely loved it. The time period Ubisoft chose couldn't be any better. The colonial times and the American Revolution are my favorite historical periods in U.S history. The new Assassin, Connor, is a very good character with a sad backstory and you will enjoy playing as him throughout the whole game. The combat is very cool, but doesn't feel as smooth compared to a game like Batman Arkham city, however still manages to be easy to fight and fun to kill oncoming British soldiers. The story is something that people will enjoy and it is pretty cool to see historical figures like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Samuel Adams, etc. From what I heard, in the previous Assassin's Creed games, there are side-missions that you can do and lets say that you failed the objective, you have to keep doing that side-mission until you get it completed. If what I am hearing is correct, Assassin's Creed 3 doesn't force you to complete the side-mission which is nice for a player like me which has a difficult time completing just a side-mission to leave the mission and try something else. Although there are a lot of good things about Assassin's Creed 3, there is a lot of issues. During the campaign, you will find fairly a lot of graphical glitches. Another problem is the battles are kinda disappointing. Instead of fighting an army of British soldiers one by one, you have to help the colonists help fight the British like shooting cannons at them, and running through rocks while British Soldiers shoot at you. Not what I expected. Last is the character Connor is good, but can be very bland sometimes and you really don't know whats going through his mind half of the time. Looking past these flaws, this game is really good and highly suggest you buy this game. Expand
  26. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    AC3 is a all new AC Experience, it has a Read Dead Redemption feeling and the best things that you love on AC series. You watch the trailers, demos and theres no surprise, it is amazing like you saw by Ubisoft. Maybe GOTY 2012.
  27. Nov 12, 2012
    1
    I can't believe they were able to sell this game in the state it's in. Glitchy and just a big mess, I wouldn't even want my worst enemy to wast their time playing this. The controls are horrid, yet critics call it "revolutionary" because of the graphics. This is just another shining example of looks over gameplay, and unfortunately this is the norm now with videogames.
  28. Nov 7, 2012
    5
    I fell in love with Assassin's Creed with the second game, and that game is still magic for me today. ACIII is massive, there are a ton of things to do, but so much of it feels meaningless or trivial, and some of the historical missions are so blatantly forced into the game and so badly done (Paul Revere's ride, for example) that it's amazing to that they made it into a game of this magnitude. There are anachronistic missions and controls problems that seem like they'd more likely be seen in a game with far less of a budget than ACIII had and, overall, this game is a complete disappointment for me. In the two years I waited for this game I never expected that I would have beaten it and sold it back within the first week of release, but here I am. Ubisoft hasn't put out a good AC game since Brotherhood and it's time to find a more inspired series not relegated to the role of cash cow. Expand
  29. Nov 4, 2012
    8
    The best Assassin's Creed in the series. This game delivers from the beginning, you have some tweaked mechanics that work really well as you fluently glide through all that oppose you. The story is captivating and engrossing, you get sucked into a world of characters that matter, with a writer that knows what he's doing. The visuals are stunning, with probably the most gorgeous water movements and physics I've ever seen. You have a masterful soundtrack, with some great action cues, and a usually stellar cast. That said, while Connor has character he can be a little thin or misguided, there are quite a few technical glitches, and I'd love to play the multiplayer, but it really is unplayable for many at the moment. The ending also put me off a little, and is somewhat reminiscent of Mass Effect's. But all of that aside you have one of the best games of the year, there's a wealth of content and really so much to do, so much to traverse and experience, that I can't effectively describe it all. You won't be disappointed. Expand
  30. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    Boring!!!! No fun factor whatsoever. I keep waiting for this game to get better but it just isn't happening. I don't usually review games before I finish them but people need to be warned that this game does not live up to the hype. I will finish the game because I want to know what happens in the story and I do love the series but it will be a struggle. The first game is still the best and in my oppinion they continue to go down hill from there. If this had been the first game in the series I would never have bought a second one. Expand
  31. Apr 28, 2013
    5
    This game was a major disappointment.The begging of the game took forever to get to the fighting.Even though the combat is really fun,the game is so boring.
  32. 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 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
  33. Dec 30, 2012
    6
    What is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the 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
  34. Apr 12, 2013
    2
    When I purchased this game I was promised a lot of things. Some of those things being hunting wild animals, a free roaming area, absorbing story, great character, captivating combat system and fresh ideas on an aging gaming series. But, on every single level it failed. First and foremost I'd just like to say if this is your first time getting an Assassins Creed game, don't bother. The story is so complicated that you will not even comprehend the game unless you've played every single other one before hand. You start off with a British assassin guy, who you don't know. Why is he the way he is? I have no idea, so as confusing as it is, you play on regardless. But the next thing you know you're in Boston, and this is where things start to get rubbish but don't worry, that's only 20 minutes in. Every mission is the same, go here, listen to this guy, go here, talk to this person, fight a few people, next mission. That's about the gist of it all.

    Never have I played a game with such clumsy, level design. I had to replay missions over and over and over again to stop it from glitching or something very peculiar happening and ruining all my progress on that level, throw in poor check point placement and you got yourself hours of wasted time. There's one point in the game early on where you have to release captured people and it took me 4 hours and 20 minutes straight to do a small part, which should of took 10 minutes due to poor level design, poor AI, poor movement and poor button layout. Who ever created the button lay out for this game had it completely wrong. You're thrown in to the game with no idea how to do anything, all it tells you is how to run. Next thing you know you're fighting 20 guys at the same time, getting shot and having no idea what to do. Not to mention you don't actually get to play the game until about 10 hours in, that's right. You have around 10 hours of the game which is considered 'build up' and 'tutorial' according to the game producers. And when it finally does let you free, it's a major disappointment. I've played Assassins Creed 1 and 2 which I enjoyed, so it seemed reasonable for me to get this. But honestly, don't waste your money. The only thing I could credit about this game is the originality I feel when I play it, it's a great idea being set in civil war America and you're an Indian assassin trying to get redemption. But that's all I can credit this game on, by far one of the most poorly produced games I've ever played. It had the raw potential to work, but the designers of the game got it terribly wrong. This, gets a 2 out of 10.
    Expand
  35. Nov 8, 2012
    4
    This is the worst Assassin's Creed in the series (I think is even worse than Revelations...). The story of this game is absolute boring, specially the past part wich is the 80% of the game, but the Desmond story was even worse... Specially the ending which is specially bad, not to mention all the bugs that game haves, it feels like an unfinished game. If you want a real AC experience just play AC2 and AC:B instead of this game... About the online part, at fist looks good, but it doesn't have many variety on places to play, and most of them looks the same. Also all the customization parts for characters are overpriced, I already have played like 70 times online, I'm in level 31 and I still doesn't have enough credits to allow me to buy character stuff, only skills.. obviously they want us to spend real money on it, also the rewards (videos) for leveling up on the online game are not good as the ones in AC:R.

    So, I'm afraid this is not an AAA title anymore. Not buying another AC on the release.
    Expand
  36. Nov 11, 2012
    6
    If I were to rank the games in order I would put assassins creed 2 at the top, brotherhood second, assassins creed 1 third, this game 4th, and revelations 5th. The game could be summarized as mediocre. Setting: The main story contains large detailed maps, but the problem is that it doesn't have any large buildings to climb like in assassins creed 2 and brotherhood or even revelations, not only that the game doesn't have that beautiful setting like Venice, I really loved Venice in assassins creed 2, it's a very colorful place, plenty of fun things in the game. Puzzles. Assassins creed 2 had tons of puzzles and they revealed pieces of a truth that was really fun. Every time I completed one i looked at what I've gathered to add more to this truth story, more importantly the puzzles had history to them and conspiracy theories, it actually gets pretty creepy. Brotherhood did the same but not to the same extent. So far I have not found anything like this, but I'm guessing they didn't do it...

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

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

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

    Overall it gets a 6/10. It has a lot of problems but nothing makes it unplayable.
    Expand
  37. Nov 11, 2012
    6
    As I was playing Assassins Creed 3 I realised that all of the oranges I had in my fruit bowl had started to go green and furry looking. Like Tennis balls. Tennis balls that emit a strange smell. As a man of science I can only presume that this occurred by way of radiation emitted by Assassins Creed 3. In summation, do not under any circumstances allow Assassins Creed 3 near your bowl of oranges. Expand
  38. Nov 7, 2012
    10
    Assassins Creed 3 is a Absolute masterpiece of a game.I've played all the Previous Titles and loved them all dearly enough to keep them in my game collection.But Assassins Creed 3 is by far the best game in the series.the graphics are top notch and the combat is fluid and smooth*almost as if you are the person in the game*movement is better then ever with super realism in every way.the story is very well written and told.the entire game is just FANTASTIC.and the multi player has gotten a good amount of improvements, and is still my fave action multiplayer ever created in my opinion.a must buy for any fan of the series. Expand
  39. Mar 25, 2013
    5
    This is what happens when the second game in your series is incredible. You have nowhere else to go so instead you throw in chair making and lumber delivery. It then takes various parts of Red Dead redmptions hunting aspect and fails at them on every level, integration and execution. these are just two of the few problems plaguing the third entry in the series. No longer do you assassinate people. That entire mechanic has been so castrated that the game is no longer about it. Compounding this is a serious case of the Kojima's. Overly long cinematics interspersed with a little bit of gameplay. From an artistic standpoint, the game falters from blandness. In AC1 and 2, every local was distinct, in had its own life. This new game misses that, everything feels the same, artistically bland.
    On the plus side, even though the game fails to use its setting properly, the controls show definite promise for use in these environments.
    Expand
  40. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed has lost it's edge in my opinion. The spectacle is there but the specialness (for lack of a better word) is gone. The setting is different this time around and I appreciate that but the formula is basically the same. Don't get me wrong, the series is still passable and (almost) worth $60 and I'm going to keep buying them but with a little less joy and excitement. Yearly releases is only hastening my exasperation. Remember Me is going to be the next Assassin's Creed and will hopefully add a surge or energy to this stealth/memory genre. Expand
  41. Nov 6, 2012
    9
    For context - I loved AC2, but found Brotherhood lacklustre and so therefore could not be bothered with Revelations. This is excellent however. It's perfectly developed as a sequel. A new engine gives it visual polish, tweaks the gameplay mechanics just enough to maintain familiarity whilst creating something tangibly new. The new protagonist is great and the narrative very compelling. If you're a fan of the original games, open world or action gaming in general it's a must buy. Also, it has that essential thing a lot of open world games miss, and is very hard to pin down - the world is compelling to explore! I've spent ages just messing around hunting and going smaller tasks - wonderful, and reminds me of the time I spent in Red Dead Redemption. Only complaint is that some elements are a little clunky, such as the menus and insertion of side missions rather arbitrarily. It's a minor issue though, I'd give it 9.5 is I could here. Expand
  42. Nov 11, 2012
    5
    Running around the frontier and hunting is pretty fun as is fighting massive amounts of enemies at one time. The graphics are incredible. The story itself is quite boring, and after a while I found myself not even caring. All the collectibles are more rewarding to find than in any of the other past games. One bad thing is the tomahawk you start with is extremely powerful, so there really is no need to upgrade your weapons at all like the past games. I always enjoy the Assassin's creed games regardless because I enjoy just running around and climbing. This is probably the second to worst in the series, right ahead of Brotherhood. If you are a fan of the series, just ignore the nay-sayers and get it, but don't expect too much or you will be let down. Expand
  43. Nov 21, 2012
    8
    It might not be the revolution we were expecting but it's pretty damn good. The game is brought down by it's numerous technical issues, but the sheer amount of things to do, the story and the fun combat make it a great addition to the series.

    As for the ending, it was disappointing but it i not as bad as people say. Overall, I think it is the best Assassin's Creed game, with AC2 coming
    very close. Expand
  44. Nov 7, 2012
    9
    I should mention first off that I'm not one of the hard core Assassins Creed fans. I've played some of the others and thought they were good but hadn't really gotten into the game until this game. Because of this I can't really compare this game to the previous ones, but I can say this is the only one that's pulled me in. While the story is as good as it always is and the graphics look fantastic its the gameplay that really sines. Its different from other creed games and this will put some people off but I really hope people will give it a chance. Don't get me wrong, the sneaking around parkour building climbing is still here but now there is a ton of other things to do. Whether its exploring the wilderness or getting into the new ship combat, or simply building up your homestead the game is never short of fun enjoyable (and more importantly, varied) quests. On top of that, there are tons of collectables for various people scattered everywhere to bring out the collector in all of us. There are some down sides, such as the numerous glitches that span all the way from goofy to game halting. I've also read that they changed up the combat and I can attest there are probably too many guards with too much health for the games own good. The games AI can be unpredictable as well making the game occasionally frustrating. Barring those little gripes, the game is great. I'm sure some Assassin's Creed vets are going to dislike the changes but I hope they, and everyone else gives this great game a try. Expand
  45. Jan 24, 2013
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Is this the worst AC to date? Possibly. If you ignore Relevations then yes. This game is so far from everything that made AC fun that it shouldn't even bear the title. Worse is that it is also the buggiest game in the series.

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

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

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

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

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

    Now the bugs. There are lots of them on even the latest patch. 1) Around and in forts guards respawn almost immediately. Once I killed a guard turned around the other way and turned back and the guard had respawned next to his own dead body. In forts it is a blood bath such that your best bet is to just run to the goals as fast as you can.
    2) Enemies are really, really sensitive. On several occasions a guard with their back to me and me in a tree behind them was suddenly picked off even though I wasn't even moving.
    3) Minigames - The players seem to look too far ahead such that winning is luck more than skill.
    4) QTEs are timed too short. Basically if you don't mash the button when it appears you'll lose. If you lose you'll generally lose a lot of health. Given that predators attack such that you cannot get away, if you lose twice you might as well reload. There are also way too many of them (although that isn't a bug).
    5) In combat you cannot get out because when you switch out of combat mode you'll likely get hit which puts you back into combat mode.
    6) In some cases if you're in combat mode but run away it thinks you're still in combat (even after minutes) and won't allow you to do certain things like air assassinate animals.
    7) On a couple of occasions an assassination target was partially clipped into the scenery making them impossible to assassinate.
    8) Bears and cougars go into an infinite escape loop if a gun goes off. Once I watch a group of bears run in circles for 5 minutes after a gun went off. They ignore everything and everyone. Another time a cougar did the same thing near a guard and the guard just kept walking by them as though they didn't exist.
    Expand
  46. Mar 3, 2013
    9
    Admito que AC III evoluiu bastante se comparado com AC Revelations, porém seus personagens não são tão memoráveis quanto os demais. O jogo não possui um vilão principal ou com maior destaque, e isso também vale para os secundários. Connor um personagem forte e habilidoso, mas sua personalidade fraca comparada seus antecessores. Os problemas de comandos são frequentes e irritantes, embortes, embora a jogabilidade tenha melhorado. Expand
  47. Nov 3, 2012
    8
    Assassins Creed III may be both a technical feat, and an astonishing game with high polish but it still doesn't innovate and falls lackluster with it's core flow and gameplay mechanics. This game is another AAA game that pushes the boundary both technically, but yet still falls short of another lackluster rehash of what seems a forever drawn out game that doesn't do anything new. The story in ASIII is a something that we haven't seen with the Templars before, but it still feels and plays like the other Assassins Creed's games. The story itself, is a little hard to follow at times, and has some rough edges that need ironing out in the cinematic and narrative department. But as for gameplay, this time around ASIII feels more action oriented with what seems a frustratingly unlimited amount of enemies to chop, slash, and cut into pieces along the way. The true reward and satisfaction that comes with this game, is not the combat, but the art of exploring the wilderness of the old Americas, fighting alongside some of the most respected names in history, and the sheer joy of just running around roof top to roof top. The multiplayer is another treat that delivers making this game a heck of a lot more than just one polished single player campaign. Online play, is nerve wrecking and feels a lot like hide and seek. There's nothing wrong with the online play, and it, in itself is worth it even if the game didn't come pack full with a highly creative single player. I give this game an 8 out of 10, simply because the single player has awesome visuals, but it still falls lackluster and doesn't innovate on-top of the drawn out series. The gameplay, feels too repetitive at time, and even too slow. That though is made up for the highly entertaining multiplayer, and the visual prowess that ASIII delivers. Expand
  48. Nov 19, 2012
    3
    I have never witnessed a triple A title with as many glitches and bugs as Assassins Creed III. How could they even manage to release one of the most anticipated games of the year in such an unpolished state?
  49. Feb 26, 2013
    9
    la verdad que me gusto bastante.Empiezo hablando de la historia, Me gusto mucho me tuvo atrapado en todo el juego(como en cualquier assassins) con algunos giros en la historia que te deja =O ,pero bue que le vamos a hacer. Una de las mejores historias de toda la saga(para mi),y de paso aprendí un poquito mas sobre la revolución americana.La jugabilidad estuvo bien, con algunos fallos peroro esta bien. Gráficamente hermoso, buen juego de sombras lastima por las sombras en los rostros que se ven feas,una ambientación genial ,mucho para explorar ,mapa mas o menos grande. Lo otro que me gusto, pero es algo muy mínimo, es que cuando corres por la nieve corra lento, ese realismo me gusto que en algunos juegos corres igual en cualquier terreno. Lo otro también que esta genial son las batallas navales son unas de las cosas que mas me gusta. Si no fuera por la cantidades de bugs y glitches que trae el juego sería de 10.A y me olvide del sistema de cerraduras de mierda que sigo rabiando que todavía no lo puedo hacer bien, pero eh mejorado e.e (me re fui del tema). En general Assassins creed 3 es un excelente juego a pesar de sus cosas malas, un juego que,mejor dicho, una saga que nadie tiene que dejar pasar por alto si no lo has jugado que estas esperando Expand
  50. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    A fantastic game that is absolutely stunning in the graphic department. The story is really well presented and the environments are huge. Tons of stuff to do and discover.
  51. Nov 11, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Once more Ubisoft gives us a good quality game in Assassin's Creed III. Pros: The visuals are beautiful, the combat has more challenge, the story and characters are very interesting, the voice acting is solid; the naval missions, though frustrating at times, are a very welcomed addition, and the soundtrack is top notch as always (despite Jesper Kyd not composing it). Cons: As many have stated, there are a million bugs (muskets floating in the air, Connor freezing while running in the frontier, mouths not moving while characters speak, etc.); the optional objectives instead of a challenge they feel like the developers are forcing you to do things in a specific way, which is ironic for a game that speaks about the importance of freedom, side missions are over-complicated at times and pointless (chasing pigs in a farm? really?), the economy system is not as organic as in the previous games. I really appreciate developers wanting to add variety, but if it has no major repercussions in the plot, then there's not much of a point in it. But most of all, the reason I'm giving AC3 a 7 and not a 9 is the ending. Oh my god! It seems written by Damon Lindelof (the "genius" behind Lost and Prometheus), which means a huge build-up that leads to an event with no payoff and only more build-up for things to come instead. I expected to see an actual conclusion to Desmond's story as the developers promised, not the writers leaving things opened. One thing is to create suspense around a story and another is just extending it to the point of making the player / viewer not to care anymore because of how frustrating it became to expect something epic and not coming. Along with Batman: Arkham City and The Dark Knight Rises, AC3 has the most disappointing ending I've ever seen. Expand
  52. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    Great game! The new location is a good change of pace than the rooftop heavy predecessors of the series. Combat and the new techniques have good additions too. Loved the AC series and this is a good step for the assassin.
  53. Jan 2, 2013
    9
    I've been an AC fan since part 1 & this is the best version since AC2. The combat is close to perfect. The story is interesting. The graphics are great. Yes, I can see how some people would find this boring due to the time period that it's set in and the pacing early on in the game. I'm not one of these people. I loved AC3 from the second I turned it on. I think I'm about halfway through, but I hope I'm not because I love it so much.
    There really is a Red Dead Redemption vibe and that game was amazing, so.....
    Expand
  54. Nov 28, 2012
    7
    The Assassin's Creed series has always been one for great story telling, impressive graphics and enjoyable game play. Assassin's Creed 3 is a solid, enjoyable game, but fails to achieve the same levels of satisfaction or quality of prior games in the series. AC3 does still have a brilliant story backed up with interesting historical facts (as long as you can learn to read between the lines of fact and fiction). For the majority of the game you play Connor Kenway, a native American who's father is a British Templar. Throughout the campaign you will earn your Assassin's garb, traverse the colonial US cities of New York and Boston along with a vast wilderness, engage pirates on the high seas and assassinate some very naughty people. I commend Ubisoft for their approach to the story, they could have easily turned it into a British hate fest like the god awful Mel Gibson film "The Patriot" but they didn't. They craft believable characters in a believable world, while the main enemy are the Redcoats and the Templars it's not always this clear cut. There are allies and enemies on both sides. Free running is as exhilarating as ever (despite the odd hiccup that will have you cursing), the combat is satisfying but feels dumbed-down if you are used to previous games in the series. Hunting animals for resources and sailing the Aquila Assassin ship on various sea missions add brilliant new mechanics to the series, raiding forts, ambushing patrols and taking on crowds of bad guys are very enjoyable. There are optional objectives for the story missions, some are fun but others just feel so counter productive often coming close to conflicting with the main objective. A good example of this comes late on in the game where you have to chase "Bad guy A", your objective is to chase him down and question him. The optional objective is "do not shove anyone", this includes your target (you have to tackle him, even though tackling and shoving both have the same end result of him on the floor not running). A lot of the time the game also never tells you of certain optional objectives until you have failed them, so this resulted in me chasing him around for an hour while people got in my way before realising I could tackle him.The stealth in the game does take a hit from the lack of a crouch button, you will auto crouch in long grass but as soon as this ends you stand bolt upright which doesn't help if you are sneaking around areas heavily guarded by enemies, you might as well shout down a megaphone announcing your arrival. I never played the series for its multiplayer but I gave it a brief go here and in AC: Brotherhood, it feels solid and makes a nice change from the usual capture the flag and deathmatch of most online games. AC3 is a good game, but if you have played AC: Brotherhood, you will notice how much was removed and ask yourself "why did it take 3 years to make this game that has less features?". If you haven't played an Assassin's Creed game before, this game will definitely keep you entertained but I recommend you play the previous games in the series so you don't miss out on the overall story and in some cases better gameplay. Expand
  55. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    its amazing how much ubisoft accomplish in this game with the gameplay and setting that just feel magic. in this **** year for gaming i realy look forward to holiday season with this game.
    the story is great and it introduces connor in realistic scenarios without ruinig them and make you feel like part of history (American history). graphics also shine especially in terms of animations a
    nd the nature, but the same doesnt aplpy for cities because they´re small and empty in my opinion. i think this is the best assassin´s creed game since the second one Expand
  56. Dec 27, 2012
    4
    BORING AND BROKED GAME! 9 or 9.5 for this game is a f#cking joke. Lame characters and lame story that involves the 2012 mayan apocalypse. Yes, it really looks like they wrote the storyline on a restaurant's napkin while taking elements of a popular myth because they couldn't think of creating something new or innovating. The combat system is laughably bad! I can't fight against the british soldiers with a straight face while witnessing the HORRIBLE combat animation and brainless hordes of enemies. The main character (Connor) is more boring than Sheppard! He's so charismatic as a f#cking plant! The lame and tedious story doesn't help either. The only good thing about this game is the Open World , navy battles and the cool ambiance of the colonial USA period, THAT'S IT. Everything else is garbage or boring. Ordinary side missions and the extreme linearity in the main missions are f#cking frustrating! Tons of bugs broke the immersion and irrational AI creates weird situations. Don't buy this game! Expand
  57. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Just played the first two sequences and I am already stunned
    The combat is amazing, every action doesn't feel like separate action but chained together
    The animation engine is really good
    There is some glitches but it's nothing that can't be fix
    10/10 and is surely the best Assassin's Creed
  58. Oct 30, 2012
    7
    I just took this promising 3rd instalment for a test run, and because of it's sheer size, (and mostly because it just came out today), I'm in no position to post an accurate and objective review.. Which is why I'm giving it a 10/10. So far so good! So good that Assassins could prove to be even cooler than Zombies.
  59. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    This is my first Assassin's Creed game, so take that into account. I'm about halfway through at this point and I'm a bit unimpressed.
    (- The story is very poorly told so far, and may in fact not be any good at all. I constantly find myself rolling my eyes -- it's not a particularly thoughtful tale and it's presentation is trite and ham-fisted.)
    (- What assassin? There are so many guards,
    who alert so easily, that stealth isn't really possible. It would help if you had some meaningful stealth abilities, but you don't. It would also be nice if there was a first-person camera for sniping, but there isn't. I don't feel like an assassin in any way.)
    (- Load times are horrendous and often.)
    (- The inability to save and revert when you want to is really frustrating. The save points chosen by the developers are not well-placed. Having to replay long and mundane portions just to reattempt the discreet optional missions gets old to the point that I simply stop caring.)

    This is a neat game with a neat backdrop, but it's not nearly as cool as it could be. It's not necessarily bad, but it certainly isn't great either. If my impressions change by the end, I'll come back and update this review.
    Expand
  60. May 8, 2013
    6
    I really wanted to enjoy this game. But there are very large flaws in it that prevent me from remembering it in a positive light.

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

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

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

    I wanted to like it, but in the end, I didn't feel like it was worth the hype. Not by a long shot.
    Expand
  61. Dec 26, 2012
    6
    Not as great as the whole altair and ezio games that came before. Story wise, the prologue was dragged out a bit if you ask me and I hated the ending. But mobility to traverse the world, new hunting system, and missions for the homestead were great.
  62. Oct 31, 2012
    9
    The AC games have continually improved over time in both game mechanics and also in graphics and the story has always been tops. This game continues that tradition and is easily the finest of them all. After 4 previous iterations they have fine tuned the game play to an impressive degree. More and more is revealed in the overall story arch as you play through the game (don't worry, no spoilers ahead) and the free running in this is stellar to the point of game play nirvana. If you like any of the previous games at all in this unique series you should try this, it will rock you. Great game, I heavily recommend this one. Expand
  63. Dec 15, 2012
    4
    The idea is great. But in my opinion, a game with bugs cannot be considered a finished game. Also I have to complain to being forced to buy additional content if I'd like to play more missions, which of course, is pointless to me if I've already completed the game's main story.

    I was aiming very high on this one, because it's focused on my favourite era, but the results are not worthy o
    f an enterprise like Ubisoft. The thing that impressed me more are the ending credits. I can't figure how so many people worked for this... This game is the pure capitalism's expression. Expand
  64. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    Ive been a fan of the assassins creed game since the first one, so i was pretty exited to get this game in the mail. but the overall experience was to be honest disappointing. Pacing was off, glitches and clipping, choppy frame rates made it hard to swallow. The game does have some positive qualities, but its not redeeming. "anyone remember the chase sequence with hickey?" This one is defiantly the weakest assassins creed to date, definitely trading this one in. Maybe next time Ubisoft... Expand
  65. Oct 30, 2012
    8
    Not what I was expecting from what I thought could potentially be the 2012 Game of the Year. From all the pre-release footage I saw, it looked like the series had gone through some heavy refinements, namely in the combat. However, it's really not that much of a difference. It's certainly more streamlined and brutal, but it's still pretty much centered around parrying attacks and going on a killing chain. That's disappointing. I expected it to be more like Batman: Arkham City where the combat has a good mix of attacking and countering, but it wound up being too much on the countering side again. I sure hope this is fixed in the future. As far as the story goes, Connor's is expertly-crafted, but Desmond's... well, let's just say Ubisoft Montreal has managed to pull off a Mass Effect 3 ending, possibly even worse. I'm utterly shocked that the ending to Desmond Miles' legacy this game portrayed was even considered by the writers. It legitimately pissed me off. Not enough to ruin the game, but definitely enough to put an utterly bitter taste in my mouth. The audio and visuals are top-notch, so I can't complain there. All in all, this *is* a good game -- it's even a great game -- but it's fallen into the same traps that all the other past titles have, even if not quite as much. Problem is, it fell into some new traps, creating a very inconsistent experience. It should have been the greatest Assassin's Creed title yet. It's one of the weakest. A game worth buying, but not with a $60 price tag. Expand
  66. Nov 29, 2012
    4
    The game is boring and annoying, two very very big problems. The gameplay has improved, making combat more fresh and movement more fluid and natural, unlike the stiff movement of previous installments, NAVAL BATTLES are absolutely BRILLIANT, fun, exhilarating, and very fresh, but that's all that's good. Exploration becomes a chore, as building climbing no longer has the awe it possessed in earlier titles, tree climbing is not interesting enough to fill the gap found in the lack of buildings, lock picking is absolutely TERRIBLE, tunnel exploration is tedious, dark and very annoying horse riding is slow and flat, not allowing for much maneuverability. Hunting is something different, but ultimately players just won't commit themselves to much hunting. Now on to story, extremely disappointed. Flat story, nothing new, nothing emotional, bad and boring characters, the only likable character is the villain, haytham. Connor is boring, too serious, lacks the charm Ezio had, lacked the bad-assery of Altair, and lacks the conviction and intelligence of Haytham. Achillies is annoying, discouraging and lacks purpose. DESMOND. His story ends STUPIDLY AND PLAIN ANNOYINGLY, IT'S SO STUPID I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT. Ultimately, AC3 tries to be fresh and introduces many new and interesting things, but many fail and the terrible story just brings this game down to a very bad score. Expand
  67. Nov 6, 2012
    7
    The Assassin's Creed game I was looking forward to. Incredibly fluid combat and movement, beautiful graphics, and finally an arching (rather than holding pattern) story. The storytelling in this game is also fantastic, as Ubisoft really made an effort to 'show' rather than 'tell' events, and avoid cut scenes as much as possible. As someone who didn't particularly like Brotherhood or Revelations, seeing AC3 take the best elements of those games, and refining and improving them was great. Very little (aside from the board game mini-games) is wasted in this game, and even the parts of the game that you do for the sake of doing them, such as collectibles and naval battles, are still fun. While the ending is very abrupt, AC3 is a solid candidate for Game of the Year in my book. Expand
  68. Nov 15, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game is pure excellence, if you a long time fan of the Assassin's Creed franchise, I would highly recommend this game to you, it's an innovative, fun Assassin's Creed game, you play as Connor, an Assassin who lost his mother at a young age, forced to keep himself alive, Connor learns how to survive by using his environment, whether it be escaping people by running through trees, or hunting animals for food.
    He joins the Assassin's guild in pursuit of the people who killed his mother, The Templars, the leader of The Templars this time is Connor's father, Haytham Kenway, who you play as for the first few sequences, he first starts to train as an Assassin after he meets an old man named Achilles, who turns him away at first, but thinks again when Connor protects his house from thugs.
    The Multiplayer is more of the same this time around, in fact, it uses the same physics and graphics engine as Brotherhood and Revelations, which the single-player doesn't, it's surprisingly fun, with a new co-op mode called "Wolfpack" where you have to hunt down AI targets as a team, which proves fun.
    STOP READING NOW IF YOU DON'T WANT ENDING SPOILERS.
    .
    .
    .
    The ending is surprising yet sadly expected at the same time, after all of his training, Desmond sadly dies to save the world from the supposed 2012 "Doomsday", this is one on the main plot points this time around.
    It set's up no introduction to a fourth game in the franchise, sadly.
    I think they will make a spin off sometime along the road, maybe on the Next Generation.
    Assassin's Creed 3 get's a strong a deserved 9/10.
    Expand
  69. Nov 12, 2012
    2
    Total disappointmet. To break it down in negative terms:

    - The cities are lifeless. You can keep on running from A -> B without any interaction as there were in AC:Brotherhood or Red Dead Redemption with people crying for help, or chasing a criminal wheras you could intervene if you'd choose so
    - The story is so confusing. It keeps time-jumping from here to there and new characters are
    introduced ALL THE TIME without any depth.
    - Conner is as interesting as an horses arse. He also lacks humangous depth, as Ezio had.
    - Glitches, glitches and more glitches.
    - Irritation UI where you have to enter the meny every time you wan't to call on the horse or an other action that isn't in the action-wheel. FRUSTRATING AS HELL.
    - Sucky implemention of fighting. Worse than any other AC game.
    - ... I could go on for hours.

    + None. All the negative ones diminish the ones I - at first - thought where positive.
    Expand
  70. Oct 31, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very boring game, worse in the series. Dumbed down a lot of features. Frame rate is horrible at times. Graphics are al right sometimes but at times you can see it's age but graphics other than frame rate aren't the reason this game is trash. Also Ending is almost as bad ass the Mass Effect 3 ending. Expand
  71. Dec 27, 2012
    4
    I wish the previews or the notes on the box said something about the missions I've actually had to go thru so far. "Enjoy missions where you... walk... slowly... listening to conversation." Ugh... I get a mission where I have to walk with someone, and listen to info related to the story, which I don't care about. Of course the person I'm to follow is walking slower than my slowest speed, so I have to stop and wait for him to catch up or get a few yards ahead of me. Who designed these "missions" and thought they'd be fun? It would be different if the conversation was clues to the next mission or something, but it's just random jibber-jabber about characters in the story which I'm already disregarding because the cut cenes are lame too! Why do developers treat their cutscenes like they're right out of a movie? We don't get distinct facial expressions or mannerisms so watching 2 wooden characters move arbitrarily while having a conversation is not anything particularly interesting. At least speed it up; we don't have to watch a guy drink a beer, slam the mug down, shake his head, turn his head, then start to speak do we? I'm skipping most of these by now... Also, several times as the game moves along, they will drop you just outside the building you're supposed to go in, then you take 8 steps to enter the building and the cutscene starts. Why not just start the cutscene instead of making we wait for the town to load, and take 8 steps, and then wait for the cutscene to load? Eavesdrop missions are nothing near being fun. Plus if you get spotted by mistake, you have to start from the beginning of the mission, and listen to the same lame dialogue again to get to the part you messed up on. I rage-quit over on these a couple times, because I'd get spotted by someone off-camera and have to start over. Then there's the great "new" addition to the AC franchise: running in snow! It's bad enough I have to commute across the entire map to get to the next mission, accidentally trying to climb every fence and tree stump I get too close to, but when I hit the woods I'm now "running" in 3 feet of snow, and it slows the already annoying chore down to sheer agony. I've been playing for hours, in the hopes that I'll get to something that is fun in this game, but am near the point of adding this to my trade-in pile. AC2 had some great buildings to climb and the dungeon puzzles, which was fun. Instead of that I have a chase mission riding a horse I can barely control thru the woods, and am bumping in to every tree and rock along the way. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but in an AC game I want to be able to explore, collect, and take missions with freedom to decide how I want to play. Why am I penalized for killing someone? Some missions have restrictions "complete mission without killing anyone" in a game called "Assassin's Creed"..? So far, not good... I'm giving this a "4" just on the anticipation I have this game will get better, based on what I enjoyed from previous games. Expand
  72. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Only idiots would score this game a Zero. Aside form a few manageable bugs this game is a big improvement from the last game, specially the graphics. The environment is simply stunning and the combat is better
  73. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    i am so confused...i am playing ACIII!!!!???i am a member of "ASSASSIN`S CREED" or playing as a regular "low-life" killer???!!???
    gameplay is good as same,with improved control and PATH-FINDING,lots of bugs but still well-design world,story is great with deep holes;i think tree-walking is not as good as building-walking in past ACs.
    still i like "ALTAIR" more that any other protagonists
    in AC.
    CONNOR is believable and grows less sympathy than "altair and ezio".hunting is cool but earning money will kick you... in middle of playing.naval fights are awesome,command and shoot,handle and fire(i like it so much).
    main missions are superb but sub-missions are weak and un-lovely.enemy AI is dumper in my idea compare to past games.
    still experience cheap deaths with anger!!!!!!!!
    "ASSASSIN`S CREED III" is still so good to me but there are so many changes in it,it is so different from AC1,it seems to me new game but i am playing it as "ASSASSIN`S CREED".
    pffff...i do not know i like this game or not?.......i like this game but i love AC1....desmond is the only BRIDGE with past for me here.
    Expand
  74. Feb 9, 2013
    5
    After huge disapointment AC3 was for me, I've started to read user reviews. All the professional gaming media were so hyped and enchanted by amount of game content that they forgot that all that matters is gameplay. AC is full of great animation, cinematic and collectibles but 70% of the game is walking from cutscene to cutscene and pressing x!! Third installment in the series could have been a revolution but it took a huge step backward and lost most of it's unique identity. Assassinations? You have to wait over 6 hours for first. Free running? Useless, because of the limited architecture and long gaps between buildings. Open world and it's distractors? Present but the game doesn't encourage you to leave main path.

    Overall, this game is average despite impressive list of features and content.
    Expand
  75. Dec 20, 2012
    9
    Assassin's Creed III is truly a great piece of work, and one of the finest video games I have played in recent times. The game is dripping with gorgeous atmosphere, and very well designed environments. One can spend hours on end simply venturing around the frontier and exploring every corner of a very wide and diverse map. The combat is fairly simple, and I found myself adapting to it with relative ease. While the campaign is being critiqued at around 10-12 hours, I personally have put around 8 hours into the title without even obtaining my assassin's robe with yet with Conner. There are plenty of ways to stay engaged with this game and truly soak everything in. I will admit that this is the first Assassin's Creed game I have ever played on my own, but really and truly if any of it's predecessors are truly 'better' titles than this game, than I believe this may become one of my favorite video game franchises. Expand
  76. Mar 17, 2013
    8
    Graphics:9//Gameplay:6//Plot:7//Soundtracks:10
    ------------7.8 good---------
    i am a big fan of AC series,unfortuanatelly this one is not that good.
    the graphics are good ,but so many glitches ,sometimes you have to restart the mission because of that,the secondary objectives are weird and technically hard or impossible to do ,and while you are on the mean mission you will not notice tha
    t they added a new secondary objective and new parameters,so you will accidantly fail full sync,riding the horse is very bad and mostly glitchey,the building and the history surroundings are not beautiful as in AC2 or AC1,although the woods and hunting is good
    the plot is boring(except for Desmond) ,the battleship is amazing ,but i expected to have more ,not only three missions .alamance: wtf,all i wanted is one ,but i finished the game with 0 ,they are impossible to touch,this is the first time i have this in AC games.also you will walk a lot to get to the mission and you often get lost in the woods,fast travelling is stupid and cannot deliver you to another cities,you have to walk and get 3 loading screens and then walk again!!!!wtf.
    it sill a good game,but it is the begining of the end for AC series imo.
    Expand
  77. Nov 18, 2012
    7
    I like the game, i'm a huge AC fan, bought all the games, love the cultural background, I find the timeline in which the back ground fascinating.

    This game however really disappointed me, because really, who cares about the American revolution other than Americans? I find myself instantly losing interest the moment I heard about the setting, but I bought the game anyways in support of m
    y favorite game title. Now, I haven't finished the game yet but I'm rather close, I like the gameplay, but the story leaves much to be desired.

    If you like AC for it's action packed joyride then this game is for you.
    If you liked AC's historical content, then you'd be better playing the second one
    Expand
  78. Nov 12, 2012
    8
    The first 3 hours of the game is spend developing the characters through gameplay, scripted sequences, and cut scenes... but after this the game opens up. Once the game gets going, there is much to do and a lot of fun to be had. AC3 seems a bit streamlined on the control, which you will either love or hate. It is more difficult to fall of a building for example. For me the AC series was becoming too complex, more like a technical button masher, so the more user friendly controls are a welcome addition... and again you will either love or hate it. There is no shortage of things to do in AC3. I like the Homested and save the district from the Templar quests, but that just scratches the surface. There is now Naval warfare which looks amazing and has very good control. Overall the game is possible the best looking game on the XBOX 360. To see Connor walking through the snow leaving a path in his wake creates a level of realism that adds to the immersion of the game. I do not agree with the 9's and 10's given to the game as there are a fair amount of technical glitches... like AI pop ins, person floating in the air, quest person stuck in crowd for a good 30 secs almost making me fail the mission... etc. But all in all the gripes are minor and do little to tarnish what is an overwhelmingly good game. I give it a 8/10 Expand
  79. Nov 7, 2012
    7
    This game gave me a very conflicted reaction -- I very much wanted to like this game, but I think its main issue lies in the setting. Whilst an Assassins Creed game set in the American Revolutionary War -- filled with tree climbing, tomahawks, horse riding and killing redcoats -- may have sounded like a good idea (and could have been transferred into a working game well, too) unfortunately this is not really the case. Both Boston and New York's buildings are all only 1 or 2 stories high (not including a few church house spires). A lot of the buildings are set far apart as well. All of this makes the free-running and parkour -- an initial selling point of the series -- feel kind of disjointed and lacking. I think they tried to compensate for this with tree climbing, but this too feels a little disjointed and the only places to practice this are out in the wilderness on rabbits and foxes -- not very mind-blowing. Another little superficial flaw for me was the style of the buildings -- America at this time was a new country, so all of the buildings are small stunted brick and wood houses. This is kind of a step backward from the sprawling marble and white stone vistas I am used to from the games before. This is not to say I do not like this setting (I adored Red Dead Redemption) but it does not really fit the series and it's pre-existing themes very well. The ship combat also felt not needed and very underwhelming. I did enjoy many things about this game however -- as always, the history was rich and charming and some of the scenery did take my breath away. Seasons were a neat change and hunting was a fun little feature. Connor lived up to his hype and was a great guy. The story was vast and fantastic and the ending was immense. However, gameplay should come above all these things, and the parkour and combat both felt disjointed and unfitting. Assassins Creed 3 is a decent game. Pick it up if you have the time. Expand
  80. Feb 26, 2013
    5
    One of the most frustrating games I've played. When it works it is brilliant and exhilarating; far too often, though, it feels simply like work. A chore. This is largely due to the fact that most side missions serve no purpose other than time filler (sea missions being the exception and the true high point of the game), and to the variable glitchy, twitchy controls--seems that at key moments the designers decided to slightly alter the control command for no apparent reason, and you end up failing full synchronization. Or in a final boss battle when suddenly you have to learn an entirely new control command scheme to succeed. At any rate, when i finished this game it was with no sense of joy or accomplishment-- just a grim determination to finish something I started. In other words, work. Expand
  81. Nov 6, 2012
    6
    While I think that AC2 is still the best in the series, AC3 has a little something, despite all the frustrations, annoyances and glitches the game has.

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

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

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

    In conclusion, while it is an enjoyable game, while it has a lot of potential, the game is ridden with glitches and bad design
    decisions that take a lot of fun out of it. Instead of breaking what was working and fixing what was broken, they could just
    have reused the previous installments basic systems and add new abilities and content. It could have been a much better game in retrospect.
    Expand
  82. Nov 8, 2012
    8
    First off if you review this game before you get your assasins suit as Conner then you are doing this game an injustice. The graphics may be the best I've seen even though I do think that a lot when I get a new game. There are bugs and glitches but it is a video game people and the world is huge. I actually think the bugs are funny sometimes like a horse walking backwards up a wall or one time I was swimming and a guy was fishing on the shore when I got close he jumped into the water and disappeared. Not a game breaker for me actually kind of funny. The missions in the beginning are boring but I'm asuming that its for the newcomers to the series and tells the story. I love the setting and some people on here are saying the cities look the same and there aren't enough tall buildings to climb. I pretty sure it did all look basically the same and there weren't that many tall buildings in those days. This isn't assasins creed 2 but it is similar in design but a lot better. The combat imo is good it is different and takes a little time to get used to but now I can fight twenty guys and not get touched like on arkam city except its better because when your done everyone is dead and bleeding AWESOME!! Ok game is great what about the multiplayer that almost noone is mentioning. It is fantastic and even better than single player if you're in the right mood. I love this game and will probably get a 10 from me by the time I finish it. Get it play it love it but give it a chance before you bash it. If this game is so bad what game is so good. Red dead hell no gta no and plaese don't say ac2 because this game takes it and multiplies it by 100!!! Let me know what you think. Expand
  83. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    The sheer amount of content put into a single disc alone should be enough reason for you to buy this game. Like the developers said, if you've never played an AC game before now's the time to hop on board. Stunning wilderness with animals going about their lives and cities filled with people make the world feel real and pull you into the game like ever before in an AC title. Graphical and gameplay bugs are common but they never pull you out from the experience. This kind of stuff is to be expected from a game that has so much content in it. The Anvil Next engine runs great on the consoles. Mostly due to the fairly short draw distance with stuff popping in at every step. After a while you won't even notice it. Mostly because of so much happening on the screen at any given moment. The animations are top notch once again. You can see the time put in to those animations while you're doing combat. The combat system is quite awesome indeed, however the enemies still tend to wait for their turn to get countered. This time around, though it won't happen so often.I won't say too much about the story, otherwise it would go to spoiler territory. I'll say this; It's on-par with AC: II/Revelations story line.(It's amazing) The multiplayer, while there's much more to it than before in terms of content, is like in AC: Revelations. If you liked it in Revelations there's a chance you'll like AC III's multiplayer. AC III is not a perfect game, it has bugs and visual glitches even after the launch patch, but the overall experience makes you ignore if not flat out forget about these problems entirely. (Also, Naval battles) Expand
  84. Nov 3, 2012
    7
    Assassins Creed 3 is a game where you stab a whole lot of people all in the name of an ancient rivalry between two groups seeking to enforce their beliefs on the world with you representing the "good" side of the equation.
    Where the previous game lacked any real progression in the story line, although padded with long, boring stretches of "look, American history", does move the main story
    along and itself contain some interesting moments. I however have no idea how new players will handle the already confusing plot.
    While "busy work" is often mundane, just exploring the world they created (and stabbing everything you see along the way) is still entertaining.
    While bugs are often accepted in open world games such as this, walking into a bar and seeing one character spinning on a chair, one standing in their chair and approaching another through the table they are sitting at are just examples of the many out of out of place things you will find. Including a number of game mission moments.
    As a fan of the series, the last game (Revelations) was an extreme disappointment and while not as good as the past games, Assassins Creed 3 is a welcomed return to form that falls just short of actually being a great game.
    Expand
  85. Nov 6, 2012
    9
    I have yet to complete the game, however so far I am loving every minute of the gameplay. Although I liked every Assassin's creed game to date, this one has surpassed all those before it. There is more to do, and new features that werent seent in the previous games. The sailing was a very enjoyable new feature to the game (They just need to make a pirate game and incorperate this). The story is captivating and leaves me wanting to play more and more. Graphics are beautiful as usual. Some complain about the changed controls, however I didn't have a problem with it, and picked it up just fine.
    Overall a solid game.
    Expand
  86. Dec 24, 2012
    7
    (Out of 10)
    Game play: 95
    Dialog: 84
    Campaign: 82
    Pacing: 79
    Graphics: 95
    Free roam: 99
    Multi player: 92
    Plot: 80
    Amaze me meter: 76
    Overall: 86
    In Assassins creed standards i was extremely disappointed by this game, but by the normal games this is a solid game. Three saving graces: Graphics, Multi player(surprisingly) and free roam. Liked the game but it still felt like a letdown
  87. Nov 28, 2012
    8
    There is so much to do in this game but most of it feels like filler and doesn't play as well as it could. you will pick out the gems for yourself but the only stand out for me is the absolutely fun and gorgeous pirate missions(an auto buy DLC if the ever decide to expand on it). The story is great mixed in with some history and the game play got dumbed down a bit but flows nicely. I welcome the tree free running and miss climbing up big buildings and cathedrals( although climbing a mountain is an o.k. second place). The MP is actually fun but it lacks in being addictive. The good definitely out weigh the bad in one of the better games I've played this year. Expand
  88. lox
    Mar 1, 2013
    5
    One word: disappointing. Assassin's Creed 3 had so much hype surrounding it, me being one of the millions who gave into it. It looked so promising and judging from the trailers it looked like it had the potential to be the best AC game yet, as well as GOTY. But the game has too many flaws in my opinion. Playing as Haytham Kenway was fun for a little while but then for me it got tiresome and I just couldn't wait to finally play as Connor, whom you don't get to play as until several hours into the game. And even when you do finally play as Connor, you realize after a while that his personality is dull as a wooden plank. The combat system in AC3 when compared to previous AC'S is new and innovative, but it eventually gets repetitive rather quickly. Fighting guards eventually turns into a chore rather than a challenge. Also, the game had almost no climax to it. There was almost nothing at all that was relatively exciting enough to get me hooked to the story or the characters. I felt like the naval missions were utterly unnecessary. And to top things off, the ending of the game was unsatisfactory and a little disappointing. The only pros I can say this game has going for it is its voice acting, graphics, and soundtrack. It has memorable music, great voice actors, and is visually impressive(e.g. the wilderness). Overall, this game did not live up to its hype and certainly didn't exceed my expectations. AC3 was over-hyped and under-delivered. Expand
  89. Apr 6, 2013
    9
    Ezio was my dude. He is the reson i loved the AC's. AC1 was rather boring. 2 BH and revalations was just wow. We realy got a view and feeling from him. Now on to conner. He is young. Its nice but i think we would need more of him to get that bond. I loved this game aswell as all of them. You know what your getting with this. Nothing new here. We see desmonds story. Sorry but I've never played for him. In the end its a good game. Great story and lots and lots of replay. Just as every AC. Expand
  90. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    wow.... This game is really fantastic. Great art production, expansive, ambitious, and long as hell.... Best of the series hands down. The open world environment is incredible, the graphics are unbelievable, and the game itself marks a huge shift in the series.
  91. Nov 1, 2012
    8
    I'm a big fan of the AC series, and overall this is an enjoyable game, but with a few hiccups. I'll start off with the issues I've encountered and that is a few bugs and glitches. Fortunately nothing that has been game breaking, but annoying such as your horse running into an invisible wall randomly on a path. And other little things that are weird, but funny such as people walking on air. Otherwise I haven't had any that have made the game unplayable. Also early on the game you are limited to what you can do, and that is common in all AC games, but it takes about 3-4 hours to finally get to a part in which you can explore and do things on your own.

    That said, there are some things this game does well to improve on the AC formula. The biggest one is the environment feels lively and breathtaking. The Frontier is beautifully and fighting off wolves and bears are fun, and makes it easy to get money. The time frame is something I personally enjoy as I love the Revolutionary War, and meeting people like Samuel Adams, John **** and taking part of the Tea Party, Paul Revere's ride, the Battles of Lexington and Concord, and so forth make it exciting, and the way they presented these events is amazing to say the least. Finally the missions overall have typical AC affair in which you constantly fighting people, but they added some new missions including naval battles and helping out people to build your community. Some of these missions are quite unique and breathes some fresh air into the series. Furthermore, the naval battles are epic and exciting to take part in. Finally the combat is more challenging now, and sometimes it's easy to get overwhelm and you take a lot of damage quickly if you don't time your attacks well. Furthermore, the new weapons and counter moves allow you to pull some cool and quick kills that make you feel like you are Jason Bourne. Overall, this is a good game in which you'll get your money's worth due to all the side missions and exploring you can do. Also if you are a history buff that loves this era, then you'll enjoy taking part of famous battles and seeing things play out.
    Expand
  92. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    I thought that this game was amazing. It is a little slow at the beginning and it isn't until a few hours in that the story actually begins to pick up. Aside from that though i have not had any problems. I had a graphics glitch occur once in the woods but aside from that no major bug issues. The game is very fun and the multiplayer is awesome. The combat system has been changed a little but i feel it is more satisfying. I would recommend picking up this game if your a fan of the series or if you just want to get into it. Expand
  93. Dec 12, 2012
    8
    Well, we waited a while, and here it is. First, the good. Within the limits of the architecture of colonial America, the game is gorgeous. Not as impressive as Europe or Turkey, with their monuments, but its still very good looking. Free running is easier and far less of a chore except that you can't pass within six feet of a barrel without the game deciding that you wanted to jump on top of it. But that doesn't matter much because the rooftops are so overpopulated with guards that you'll be spending most of your time on the ground anyway. Free running though the trees of the frontier is a pleasure, however. Ubisoft introduced a new naval mechanic, which deserves its own game. Finally, the world is huge and chock full of enemies to kill. All that is why I am a bit bemused at the games shortcomings. First of all, it is glitchy. Ok, it isn't a Fallout New Vegas level of disaster here,but I still wasn't able to liberate New York North more than 90% despite having done all the liberation missions. Ubisoft didn't put any view points there in an attempt to force exploration. I hope that they never do that again. I spent an entire afternoon mapping that pain in the rear part of town, looking for what I had missed. I found nothing. Then I gave up and went off to do some naval missions. When I came back, darned if North New York wasn't showing as being liberated. It seems that the game needs to reset before it will register the liberation of that area. Horse riding is a disaster. The occasional horse getting stuck in a watering trough I don't really mind, but I do mind trying to navigate on a horse that can jump fences but that stops dead at every tiny rock. The game also has the irksome quality of trying to hold my hand during missions. In previous games of the series I came to enjoy planning my kills and experimenting with different approaches, but ACIII mutinies whenever I do something it doesn't expect. Like my second grade teacher, ACIII can never resist telling me what to do and punishing me if I do anything else. Do anything that the designers didn't intend you to do and your game is likely to end. Full synchronization has become a way for the game to punish the player for not doing exactly what the designers think he should. It becomes a terrible bore very quickly. The combat system, which Ubisoft had nearly perfected in previous installments was badly dumbed down. I found the "time stopping" after a parry to be tiresome in the extreme. What, Ubisoft? it wasn't easy enough to begin with? The true strength of the AC franchise is its narrative and characters, which is one of the biggest reasons that I find myself a touch disappointed with AC III. The plot is, in a word, absurd. The overarching themes of liberty versus order and familial attachments versus perceived duty are satisfying enough, but the narrative strings together some pretty ridiculous plot elements. For example, I can't think of a single instance in which a Mohawk half breed with no experience with the military conventions of the day ever commanded a Continental Army in the field with no more than a few cursory instructions, which Connor does at the Battle of Concord. Nor can I imagine such a person, possessing zero nautical training, ever succeeding to the command of his own warship. Which warship, by the way, he keeps tied up behind his house as if it were a ski boat. These roles required years or decades of experience, which could not be acquired in a frontier basement. A guy like Connor might eventually make a decent platoon leader, but casting him in the simultaneous roles of brigadier general and ship captain is just too over the top to be believable. I appreciate that Ubisoft seems to have an agenda of inclusion, but if they are going to do that, then it has to work. The Connor persona doesn't work. The rather jarring notion of a person like Connor ever encountering the Assassins, much less becoming one, is something that could have used more exposition because, as he is, the Connor character requires too much suspension of disbelief. Too, Connor's naivete is as breathtaking as it is inappropriate for an assassin. He has no particular stake in the Assassins' mission.. He is all about his own parochial motives. In short, he just doesn't have the feel of an assassin. Ezio's story was immersive and compelling. Connor's story is a cartoon, and the problem stems from the fact that Ubisoft seems to have no vision of the assassins' order in the first place. We thought they did, but ACIII reveals the existence of an identity crisis regarding this franchise. The American Revolution might have lent itself to an AC story, but ACIII is not such a story. All that said, while this game is not exactly a jewel in Ubisoft's crown, ACIII is fun to play and worth the purchase, but ACII still remains the best of the series. Expand
  94. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    Game of the Year contender! Frontier hunting + Ship battles = Awesome! The game also has a very good replay value. Graphics are nice. I don't see any competition here. Dishonored = too short. Halo 4 = more of the same. Black Ops 2 = more of the same.
  95. Nov 2, 2012
    7
    Are you kidding? More than 70 to THIS? It's AC, but NOT a good AC! It's just walking to cutscene to cutscene. EVEN MORE THAN MAX PAYNE 3 (that consists in a 60% of cutscenes). Okay, the graphics are good, voice acting for Spanish version was great, and I found funny to play in-game games (INCEPTION!), but it's not SO REVOLUTIONARY as AC or ACII (even ACBH for the On-Line).
  96. Nov 4, 2012
    7
    Sadly, this Assassin's Creed experience wasn't what I had hoped it would be. Don't get me wrong, it's a good game, but it's only a good game and nothing more. The game starts off well but it's all down hill from there. There aren't many new features and the combat is basically the same. Sure you can hunt, and sail ships but if I wanted to do those things I'd buy 'Cabela's Big Game Hunter' or 'Sid Meier's Pirates!'. The story telling aspects are poor also. You find yourself jumping from month to month, not really feeling that well connected to the characters. The multiplayer is quite repetitive to say the least. It's not bad but why spend your time playing AC3's multiplayer when there are much better multiplayer experiences elsewhere? The worst part about AC3 is the ending, it'll leave you annoyed and confused, kind of like a big slap across the face, especially to long time fans of the series. The game might keep you occupied for no more than a few days and it is somewhat enjoyable but in contrast with the previous games it comes up short in it's presentation, storytelling and gameplay. Expand
  97. Dec 2, 2012
    0
    What a complete waste of time. I actually could't play this game for more than two hours at a time, fearing my heart would give in from my frustration:-) Every aspect of this game i worse than even AC1. Let aside the battles at sea whitch was new and great. The buttons, the story, gameplay, grafics, caracters, conversations, cutcenes, I could go on and on, they all suck! Do not buy this game, and spare yourselves from a lot of pain. Alex Hutchinson name is now burned in to my brain, and i will forever shun from anything he puts his name on Expand
  98. Mar 22, 2013
    7
    This game counts as my reintroduction into the Creed world. I played the first but not the second so I was really looking forward to getting back to assassinating some guys. The problem I encounter with this game is in order to have fun you have to deal with TONS of load and TONS of cinematics. Don't get me wrong the quality of the cinematics is not in question, and I enjoyed the story. I just wonder if some of this could have been executed in game play or even exposition during some of the loads. All told this is a beautiful game with nuggets of solid fun. Defiantly worth checking out. Expand
  99. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Nothing revolutionary here. It´s an OK AC game. PROS: -AnvilNext Engine is superb, and, surprisingly, not very glitchy, given the GIGANTIC environments. -TONS of missions. -Commanding your frigate is GREAT ! CONS: -Ultra dumbed-down controls: everything seems automatic. You just press RT and move forward. Parkour inside the houses ? No, no: it´s just a cinematic. -Tree Parkour is great, but since there are no clear visual clues to where you can hop on the trees, you will be, most of the time, riding a horse or walking, A LOT.
    -The American Independence war story and sites are not as appealing as previous AC´s plots. Besides, an african-american as a master assassin and a native-american so fondly helping the founding fathers is too far-fetched.
    -Very cliché father-son sub-plots, inside and outside the animus. You´ve seen this before ...
    -A 5-year-old child can combat in this game.
    Expand
  100. Nov 2, 2012
    9
    I rushed to review this and I was unfair to it, I criticised it for its very slow beginnings but one this gets going I'm really enjoying it. It's true that some of the missions are unforgiving and it can be frustrating but once youre hanging people from the trees it becomes something else.

    Some will be turned off by the sheer scale of AC3 and yes there are bugs occasionally but all in a
    ll I'm enjoying this. Brotherhood was the high and Revelations was a disappointment this is doing new things and while it's not perfect and will have its critics I'm glad I bought it. Expand
Metascore

Generally favorable reviews - based on 61 Critics

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