User Score
6.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1222 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jan 11, 2013
    7
    I consider myself to be a great fan of Assassin's Creed Series and to be honest, this game is good but not great as the former 2 parts were. It lacks some of the intriguing missions Altair and Ezio had to investigate, it lacks more interaction with historic characters, it lacks epic battles like the ones we were so used to fight with Ezio, and the magical atmosphere on past, present andI consider myself to be a great fan of Assassin's Creed Series and to be honest, this game is good but not great as the former 2 parts were. It lacks some of the intriguing missions Altair and Ezio had to investigate, it lacks more interaction with historic characters, it lacks epic battles like the ones we were so used to fight with Ezio, and the magical atmosphere on past, present and future is lost. I always felt a deep connection between Desmond Miles and Altair/Ezio, but it's like Connor is from another linage, and it's not 'cause he's american indigenous, I actually believed this condition would be great for developing an interesting storyline that could conclude with the saga satisfyingly, I mean, It is a really rich character full of possibilities among so different cultures, but I only got that from the videogame: "what it could be and it was not". Expand
  2. Mar 22, 2013
    5
    Such a heartbreaker! Been a fan of AC since the beginning and have loved the adventure/history blend. Am also a fan of the American Revolution. AC's gameplay has always been stellar... until now. The game is one big glitch. Don't know if I'll buy AC: IV. Yes, it has pirates but this player has been burned.
  3. May 17, 2013
    7
    Firstly I would like to say that Assassin's Creed 3 is an enjoyable game. All the elements that made the previous games so much fun are still present, but, in a similar way to Fallout: New Vegas, AC3 doesn't do much to improve upon the previous game other than a new setting. Having said that, this is good news if you loved the previous game in the series and just wanted more of the sameFirstly I would like to say that Assassin's Creed 3 is an enjoyable game. All the elements that made the previous games so much fun are still present, but, in a similar way to Fallout: New Vegas, AC3 doesn't do much to improve upon the previous game other than a new setting. Having said that, this is good news if you loved the previous game in the series and just wanted more of the same once you'd completed it.

    The new, vastly different setting and historical context does give the game a completely different feel and freshens the series. It's cool to experience a very different point in history, especially one that is so much closer to the present day, so much more relevant and set a lot closer to home for many players.

    The new setting means there are lots of trees which you can climb, which might sound novel but it's basically just the same thing as climbing a building, except your in the middle of nowhere with no reason to climb the tree...

    The naval battles are probably the biggest addition to the series (and were basically the only reason I got the game) but really don't feature that heavily in the storyline. I thought that concept would really get milked but as far as I can tell there is only one point in the game when you get to board another ship which was disappointing as it was a really promising area that was a lot of fun.

    The biggest disappointment in this game (and it was a huge disappointment) is the storyline. For most of the story I really had no idea WHY Connor was doing what he was doing, and at many times it seems like he doesn't know either. And to be honest, the game didn't really do anything to make me care. There doesn't seem to be that much of a purpose to him going around assassinating people. Every cut scene tries to add some ambiguity surrounding what's right and wrong, and who the real bad guy is, but just end up confusing everything even more. It's all left very vague. Every twist that the storyline takes just makes it worse and seems to give Connor LESS of a reason to fight. Ultimately, he's only assassinating people because he's the main character in a game called "Assassin's Creed 3".

    And the ending... Don't even get me started on the ending... It's the worst ending of any game series I've ever played. It might be the worst ending to any game series ever. Assassin's Creed (not to mention all of the fans) deserved more. This shouldn't really affect your decision to buy the game because it doesn't affect the gameplay but you will be left disappointed. I myself stared at the screen going "...is that it?..." (it's not very long either) and then sat through what must have been 20-30 minutes of credits to see if I was actually only half way through the game.

    AC3 is a fun game and if you liked the previous games you'll like this one just as much, but this game isn't reinventing the wheel. There's nothing revolutionary here (ironically).
    Expand
  4. Sep 11, 2013
    7
    Un titulo interesante debido a su anterior saga, pero con unos altibajos notables: Los gráficos se podría decir que incluso han empeorado respecto a los últimos Assassin's Creeds, pero lo importante aquí reside en otras cosas como la nave Aquila, sin duda algo perfecto, un gran barco disponible para realizar batallas navales, el bajo: No se puede usar en un modo libre. En mi opinión, elUn titulo interesante debido a su anterior saga, pero con unos altibajos notables: Los gráficos se podría decir que incluso han empeorado respecto a los últimos Assassin's Creeds, pero lo importante aquí reside en otras cosas como la nave Aquila, sin duda algo perfecto, un gran barco disponible para realizar batallas navales, el bajo: No se puede usar en un modo libre. En mi opinión, el nuevo traje de Connor es bueno, recordando el estilo de la saga, pero en la compra de este articulo parece haber poco en lo que elegir, otra cosa que me gusto fue la posibilidad de llamar al caballo, pero el bajo es sus continuos errores, cuando entra en el agua en ocasiones se crea un bug, al igual que es muy ficicil montarlo si vas por el bosque. Como he dicho un buen juego, no me decepcionó, pero tambien tiene errores que necesitan ser pulidos. Expand
  5. Apr 13, 2014
    6
    This game being my first time playing anything from the Assassin's Creed franchise I was very impressed at how the story plays out, the game play, and just the look back in history premise these games bring. If you were to ask me what I thought about this game a little over a year ago I would have said it was fantastic!
    However after playing AC2, I became more and more disappointed in
    This game being my first time playing anything from the Assassin's Creed franchise I was very impressed at how the story plays out, the game play, and just the look back in history premise these games bring. If you were to ask me what I thought about this game a little over a year ago I would have said it was fantastic!
    However after playing AC2, I became more and more disappointed in what AC3 was.
    This is still a good game (don't get me wrong) but it just does not compare to the previous entries in the franchise.
    Expand
  6. Jun 15, 2014
    6
    Assassin's Creed III continues the experiences of Desmond and the team, and moves on to two new ancestors of Desmond, Haytham & Connor, who are father and son respectfully. AC3 takes forever to get started, you actually play as Connor, but for the first two sequences you play as Haytham. This become rather droll and the story in the overall game moves very slow and with uneven speed. ThisAssassin's Creed III continues the experiences of Desmond and the team, and moves on to two new ancestors of Desmond, Haytham & Connor, who are father and son respectfully. AC3 takes forever to get started, you actually play as Connor, but for the first two sequences you play as Haytham. This become rather droll and the story in the overall game moves very slow and with uneven speed. This iteration of the series is also very cinematic heavy, you'll perhaps do 3-5 minutes of actual playing followed by a 1 - 2 minute cinematic (you can skip the cinematics, but then the plot is basically meaningless). This iteration feels very much rushed, a lot of things go wrong in the game.

    As most people have reviewed this game is plagued with bugs and glitches, now I actually am a game programmer myself (I even have a degree in it), and some of the bugs that have gotten through quality control are absolutely absurd. I had hoped that a few years down the road that most of the important and game break bugs would be fixed, but they aren't. I know the Xbox 360 doesn't have the most advanced hardware specs and given the size of the worlds the Assassin's Creed series has come to be known for, but this is a bit too much.

    I can't count the number of times I'll be walking (this is later in the game around sequence 9 for whatever reason) and I'll be incognito and walk past a guard and suddenly all the guards in the area will attack me as if I had been Notoriety Level 3. This is awful, because it happens repeatedly, and I'm not talking 1 or 2 guards, I'm talking upwards of 7 - 10, not all of them infantry that can be killed using simply counters. I've also seen (and took a picture, wish I could post it) a manikin sitting on the seat of a hay trailer, it's like the texture for whatever person was supposed to be there is missing so what I see if the plain white model of a human. Also something you'll notice and these are actually acceptable bugs considering the limitations of the hardware, but texture pop-ins are a thing you'll have to get used too. You can be riding your horse and getting to a bridge and clearly see that when your about 50 meters from the bridge the higher resolution texture will pop-in and if you're running in a grassy area you can see the grass actually grow right in front of you. They just overlay the ground ahead of the player with a texture of grass, then as you get closer to be able to interact with it they pop the model in, well it's like watching time move fast because the grass will grow right before your very eyes.

    I'm hoping that future iterations of the Assassin's Creed series will be benefited by the new hardware from the Xbox One and Playstation 4. I'd suggest you play this game only for the story to find what becomes of Desmond, but if you're looking for the charming character development like Ezio or anything like Brotherhood/II you'll be sadly disappointed.
    Expand
  7. Nov 22, 2012
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. So I just finished Assassin's Creed 3... um... really guys? That's how you end it? I mean really?! I mean I didn't think it could get any worse after limping my way to a bar and anticlimactically killing Charles Lee (The main all-powerful bad guy in the game) by simply leaning over casually and stabbing him, but it did... So a global aurora borealis happens and then whaaa?! Nothing?! Just credits and a glimpse of the mountain alien/A.I./whatever as it walks off chiding about it's victory? I know that may seem cryptic, but that's how it fuggin ends folks! Sorry if I'm ruining this for anyone but this game deserves to be ruined. It deserves it because it soiled the hours I put into completing the great 2/3 of the game I did like.

    So right before you chase down Charles Lee, through a horribly scripted burning boat scene, I'd advise anyone playing this game right now to eject the game disc, smash it, and then send the remains to "I wonder why were going bankrupt? Oh yeah..." Ubisoft. Because that would be an infinitely better ending than the one they eventually give you.

    Oh yeah and **** pivots. C+
    Expand
  8. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed 3 is exactly what people should have expected. This game should not have been hyped nearly as much as it was. It is just as good if not slightly better than revelations. Don't expect something as innovative, charming, or impressive as Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed Revelations or have followed the entire series and don't mind more of the same with shinier graphics; BUYAssassin's Creed 3 is exactly what people should have expected. This game should not have been hyped nearly as much as it was. It is just as good if not slightly better than revelations. Don't expect something as innovative, charming, or impressive as Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed Revelations or have followed the entire series and don't mind more of the same with shinier graphics; BUY THIS GAME IMMEDIATELY! But if you are anything like me and are sick of these uninspired sequels to the once great series known as Assassin's Creed; then leave it alone. Don't even wait for the price to go down, just see it as what it is: a cash-in. Expand
  9. Nov 2, 2012
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm a big fan off the AC series, but 3 seems lacking. I'm playing on the PS3. I was looking forward to climbing and jumping from tree to tree , but the mechanics don't work very well. Tons of glitches, so-so graphics, combat feels clunky, and *small spoiler* when you go to get your training there seems to be parts of the conversations missing. "Will you train me?"

    "No."

    "How about now?"

    "No."

    "Just beat up some guys. Now?"

    "Yep. BTW, I instantly know who's son you are even though you didn't tell me cuz I have The Shining or something."

    *YEARS LATER, NO CUT SCENES OR OBLIGATORY TUTORIALS*

    "Ok, you're trained. Off you go!" There are good parts, though. The voice acting is great and um..... yeah. Point is, the game is still playable, though you're gonna have a few rage quits.
    Expand
  10. Nov 3, 2012
    5
    I think this game seriously suffered from the hype. Amazing new graphics! Biggest map ever! Hunting! Look at all the cool things we can do! The developers lost their way. The little details are great, but the overall pieces just aren't. Best examples: combat is difficult, harder than any AC game before it. It takes forever to get anywhere, because the frontier is huge and the cities areI think this game seriously suffered from the hype. Amazing new graphics! Biggest map ever! Hunting! Look at all the cool things we can do! The developers lost their way. The little details are great, but the overall pieces just aren't. Best examples: combat is difficult, harder than any AC game before it. It takes forever to get anywhere, because the frontier is huge and the cities are full of guards who seem to be much smarter than they were in previous games. And while I love US history and the story so far, it doesn't make up for the fact that this is a frustrating game to play, just because of how the game is set up to work. I'm sad really. Everyone was expecting a masterpiece, and what we got was a decent game at best. There are some fun parts. But ultimately, if I was new to the series, I wouldn't be coming back. Expand
  11. Nov 5, 2012
    7
    To quickly sum up:
    Graphics 9/10 Only glitches let it down.
    Sound 8.5/10 Longevity 10/10 Presentation (the history infused is particularly impressive) 10/10 Story 7/10 Mission variety 5/10 Game play 6/10 Killing enemies is boring half the time and quite fun the rest of the time. Free-running is far too easy and boring, as all you do is holding down R1 and aim where to jump.
    To quickly sum up:
    Graphics 9/10 Only glitches let it down.
    Sound 8.5/10 Longevity 10/10 Presentation (the history infused is particularly impressive) 10/10
    Story 7/10
    Mission variety 5/10
    Game play 6/10 Killing enemies is boring half the time and quite fun the rest of the time. Free-running is far too easy and boring, as all you do is holding down R1 and aim where to jump. Overall 7/10 If Ubisoft spent a month fine tuning the game play, to make the player control more of Conner and reduced glitches it would be a 9/10.

    Good: The graphics and sound are very good, combined with what the people in assassin
    Expand
  12. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    This likely won't be a new position, but I'll start my review by stating that I've played every single Assassin's Creed game through to completion - 1, 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations, playing 1 and 2 twice each. I'm not some newcomer to the series. Which is why I am pained to say that AC3 is a massive let-down. To begin with, players are thrust into the series' running protagonist,This likely won't be a new position, but I'll start my review by stating that I've played every single Assassin's Creed game through to completion - 1, 2, Brotherhood, and Revelations, playing 1 and 2 twice each. I'm not some newcomer to the series. Which is why I am pained to say that AC3 is a massive let-down. To begin with, players are thrust into the series' running protagonist, Desmond Miles in a moderately interesting first sequence that serves as an intro to new players and a refresher for series veterans. This sequence contains an irritatingly un-skippable tutorial on how to perform free-running actions (hint: hold RT and the game chooses where you go. It's that blindingly simple). The tutorial grinds on for an agonizing 10 minutes or so. It was not a good omen of things to come. As other reviewers have mentioned, the first (almost) 10 hours of the game is essentially a drawn-out intro to the game. I'm probably a good 7 hours in and I still haven't gotten access to the second city, New York. C'mon dev's - cut me loose. The exposition is a painfully long slog through various new (and old) AC gameplay elements, including the new hunting "feature" (clearly added in order for devs to talk about something at trade shows), the fun-as-it-sounds accounting system for your new homestead, and the surprisingly exciting naval combat sequences. Obviously, since my campaign experience is not yet complete, I cannot review it to its fullest; however, I can (and will) review gameplay mechanics. They are, to put it mildly, frustrating. Holding RT to free run was touted by Ubisoft as a 'revolutionary' gameplay choice. "You no longer need to hold both RT and A to free run / parcour / climb," they said. Well, frankly, this change should not have been implemented. There's a reason why the two were separated. In the old system, players could run by holding RT in order to sprint around roads within towns, without needing to worry about accidentally climbing up buildings or onto market carts. With the new one button system, I find myself wanting to run around towns, but having Connor consistently trying to run up a building instead of staying confined to the ground. Its a frustrating and entirely unnecessary element to the game that serves to make me hate each increasing moment I spend in the AC3 world. Couple this with the intensely finnicky combat system and the game is more of a chore to play than an exercise in enjoyment. The combat system just feels less refined than in prior games, including the very clunky system of AC1. Parrying / countering attacks is intensely hit-and-miss, with Connor performing the action with maybe half of my button presses. Moreover, the game asserts that hitting X after parrying with B should perform a counter move in which Connor attacks his attacker. This does not happen. Ever. As a result, combat becomes yet another chore, in addition to running between objectives. But what about free-running? Surely that must be good, right? Nope. AC3 has given players less of a choice of where Connor free-runs and has seemingly introduced a system where the game makes jumping choices for the player. On the surface, this may seem like a positive, but when you're in a chase and you want Connor to jump from a roof to another and instead he jumps on the chimney of the first house, causing another death, it gets old. I analogize this new system to an overly-tuned auto-aim feature in a FPS game. Too much auto aim and you find your character aiming at enemies that you aren't trying to attack. All in all, it seems to me that Ubisoft tried to do too much with AC3. The gameplay mechanics worked much better in AC2, Brotherhood, and Revelations. Freerunning was more fluid, combat was more fluid, everything was simply *easier*. And not easier in a sense of difficulty level. Easier, in that the system made more sense. I knew where Connor would go, because I would point him in that direction and execute the proper button sequence (RT to run on the ground, RT+A to run). Combat was much less hit-and-miss. When I pressed the button to counter, Ezio would counter. Simple as that. AC3 is more of a chore to me than a game. I want to finish it because I want to see how the story plays out. But with every increasing minute I play AC3, I find myself wanting to play less AC3. And all of this doesn't even touch the other issues I've run into. One hard freeze, where my Xbox completely locked up in the middle of a story mission, one where my character motions were in 50% speed until I restarted my console and an assassination mission where, after killing my target, the completion sequence did not trigger, so I was forced to do another restart. And when gameplay mechanics are decidedly below-average, re-doing a mission because of technical glitches becomes an extreme irritant. I wanted to love AC3. I really did. And the work put in makes it clear that the devs did too. They just tried to do too much. Expand
  13. Nov 6, 2012
    7
    I have played Assassin's Creed from day 1. What disappoints me about this installment is that i feel let down. From AC1 to AC2 they made drastic improvements to the game and it was a great step forward. With AC3 i feel as if they took a step back. They almost tried to do too much with the game. Instead of focusing on doing things well, they did a lot of things okay. I do not like theI have played Assassin's Creed from day 1. What disappoints me about this installment is that i feel let down. From AC1 to AC2 they made drastic improvements to the game and it was a great step forward. With AC3 i feel as if they took a step back. They almost tried to do too much with the game. Instead of focusing on doing things well, they did a lot of things okay. I do not like the characters one bit in the game and Connor is by far the least interesting of all the Assassins and actually quite annoying. The fight systems took a step back and it seems like it takes for ever to kill an enemy. Not to mention it seems like i continually get caught on all the little things in the environment. I constantly find myself running up a tree or a wall when really i wanted nothing to do with them. This is not due to my lack of knowing how to play the game but more because Connor can climb almost anything that just by running by something he seems to be attracted to it and just run up it. I am on DNA sequence 10 out of 12 and overall the game is a decent game. The story is pretty good but i wish i was more involved with the revolution as they lead you on to believe you are, not just some errand boy. It is a above average game i was just expecting more out of it. Especially being that i tried to read nothing about it so not to over anticipate it and give it no chance to live up to my standard. But even with ignoring most news about the game i just feel like there is so much they wanted to do with the game and just fell short a little. Expand
  14. Nov 7, 2012
    7
    It's an OK game but not great. The graphics look like dreamcast, Need to lower 3-D strength to 1 and increase brightness to 7 which gives more natural look. Desmond, Shaun, Rebecca looked kinda goofy. I like the way they were in AC2 & BH. Start is slow and boring. I find collecting feathers, trinkets, almanacs to be a bit annoying. Almanacs are the worst. Almost every viewpoint trees areIt's an OK game but not great. The graphics look like dreamcast, Need to lower 3-D strength to 1 and increase brightness to 7 which gives more natural look. Desmond, Shaun, Rebecca looked kinda goofy. I like the way they were in AC2 & BH. Start is slow and boring. I find collecting feathers, trinkets, almanacs to be a bit annoying. Almanacs are the worst. Almost every viewpoint trees are the same. Frontier/homestead missions were kinda lame. Hunting and discovering animals seems kinda pointless. I don't like being forced to skinned every animal when I ditch them. Attacking & looting convoys aren't worth much the rewards. You're better off just looting chest boxes instead. Naval missions were a bit boring. Controls were kinda dumbed down. What happened to the throwing knives? You can't grab ahold enemies, you have to deflect attack then grab them but it throws them automatically. You can't chuck weapons at enemies like in AC-BH & Revelations, it would be cool to spear a redcoat with a bayonet from range or throw an axe. Combat seems less evolved than previous AC series. No dodge? Seriously?? You cannot do double assassinations easily while standing, I performed double air assassinations more than standing. The story is not bad though except the beginning. Some parts were rushed and forced. I find one mission 'Boston Tea Party' to be frustrating when you have throw guards into water which puts you in awkward positons. Limiting number of kills / don't shove anyone while chasing as an optional objective is ridiculous. Connor seems dull but finally flourished after chasing and killing Hickley. Ending is not that great, you have to sit and wait for a 20 minute cast to pass to finally get game completion achievement. I'm pretty disappointed, it doesn't feel like an AC game, the elements were off and different. Felt like playing Red Dead Redemption with AC elements. I find it hard for me to care to replay through the 5 hour boring slow start again. Expand
  15. Nov 17, 2012
    5
    I first of all have to say that I had really high hopes for this game. The first AC did not really strike my interest but it did intrigue me enough to give ACII a try and I was blown away. Then ACII:B came out and I was hooked. The combat was fun, the stories were awesome and Ezio was a fantastic protagonist. Then when Revelations stumbled a bit I thought it was just a bump in the road.I first of all have to say that I had really high hopes for this game. The first AC did not really strike my interest but it did intrigue me enough to give ACII a try and I was blown away. Then ACII:B came out and I was hooked. The combat was fun, the stories were awesome and Ezio was a fantastic protagonist. Then when Revelations stumbled a bit I thought it was just a bump in the road. Boy was I wrong. ACIII comes out of the gate limping. The graphics might be beautiful but they are only skin deep as pop ins and texture tearing is rampant.

    Then there are the glitches...Oh the numerous, numerous glitches. From getting stuck in a pile of hay to watching a guard fly into the stratosphere the glitches are everywhere and range from funny, a woman spawning into the back of a cart and being dragged along, to game breaking, finding Connor frozen in place while his target gleefully runs away. The glitches could be forgiven if it wasn't for the fact that these two examples appeared AFTER the day one patch. That's right, after Ubisoft claimed they were fixing the numerous issues I got the pleasure of having the game break several times.

    The there is the story and characters. The AC franchise has been a series that has done a tremendous job of transporting gamers to unique locations, and while this one is no exception, the Colonies in 1775 are beautiful and full of life, the story and characters come off lacking. Connor is in no way shape or form a replacement for the charismatic and dangerous Ezio. Where as Ezio was charming and roguish and likable, Connor is quiet, easily angered and all around just bland. He continually asks characters, "what would you have me do," a number of times while having paper thin motivations. I find it troubling when the side characters in a game highlight just how bland and boring our main character is. I found myself wanting to play as Samuel Adams, at least he has a range in his vocalizations and has clear motivations.

    This seems to be ACIII's problem, it looks the part and is trying to convince you that it is the next step in the franchise but its motivations are all over the place. The combat is fun, if a bit too familiar (Arkham City) and the ship battles are fantastic. But for every step forward the game takes two, even three steps back. Why is it that I am doing eavesdropping missions when they were one of the worst gameplay aspects of the FIRST AC?! Also why is it that AC:B and Revelations gave me more options to complete missions where as ACIII punishes you for not completing a mission precisely how the developers planned it? For freedom it seems a bit constrained.

    Which brings me to the 100% sync. Introduced in Brotherhood, this was a clever way to challenge players. In Brotherhood and Revelations it was just that, a challenge. In ACIII 100% sync becomes a tedious almost torturous chore and goes to highlight the broken gameplay mechanics and a number of irritating glitches. If I am supposed to kill my target without anyone noticing don't make it so my hidden blades alert every damn guard in Boston! It goes to frustrating even further when you realize that you cannot complete epilogue missions without getting 100% sync, which means that as a fan of the franchise, if you want to see the real 100% ending of the game you have to do the OPTIONAL side objectives. Ubisoft, don't make something optional and then purposely withhold content from the ending of the game. The 100% sync options come off as cheap and lazy, as though the developers added them in at random to flesh out bare boned missions. I really wanted to love this game, so much so that I thought I could hail it as a huge leap for the franchise, much as ACII was from AC. But that was not to be. Instead I came away from ACIII feeling as though three years of development and anticipation evaporated into a cloud of mediocrity. ACIII is in no way a revolution, it is more a slight step forward with a bum leg and an eye patch. Here is hoping we don't have to see two more games of Connor before we truly get the next huge step for the franchise.
    Expand
  16. Nov 18, 2012
    7
    Pros-
    Navel battles are **** awesome
    So much details and Thematic Period Environments Extensive and Fully Featured Multiplayer Modes Great Cinematics and well Voice Acting Cons- The **** Blinding White Loading Screens pissed me off All Major Set Piece Battles are Disappointing and its not like the trailers Pointless Side Activities seriously they are just pointless Terrible
    Pros-
    Navel battles are **** awesome
    So much details and Thematic Period Environments
    Extensive and Fully Featured Multiplayer Modes
    Great Cinematics and well Voice Acting

    Cons-
    The **** Blinding White Loading Screens pissed me off
    All Major Set Piece Battles are Disappointing and its not like the trailers
    Pointless Side Activities seriously they are just pointless
    Terrible Ending to Desmond Storyline FUUUUCCCCKK SAKES
    Rooftop gameplay diminished GRRRRRRRRRRR
    but overall this game was good i give it a 7/10
    Expand
  17. Nov 22, 2012
    5
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. ...Continues from previous comment:

    What I didn't like:
    - The LAG: It is the first thing you notice when you start playing the game, do not lie to yourselves guys, this games lags, and it does it horribly. How can this happen in 2012? When you get to Boston or New york the game is almost unplayable, all immersive feeling towards the game you might have achieved absolutely breaks up when you see that painfull, unforgivable lag.
    -The glitches:Unforgivable Ubisoft... glitches in this game are a bad joke.
    - The fight system: somethings are better, the blood is great, but i HATE the camera; character seems so far away when you're fighting and you wish you cold just look closer. Besides, you get a feeling of "Arkham city" with this new fighting system, one button magically blocks the attack, and then you can counter. If that was the intention, let me tell you that Assassin's Creed never needed to copy or imitate another game's fighting system... well, that's how I felt when playing it.
    - Too much running: The missions were like: Frontier to Boston, Boston to frontier, frontier to New york, New york to frontier, Frontier to homestead, homestead to frontier, frontier to boston, and so ON, it was like they were forcing you to go through the world over and over for you to see how wonderful it was, or using fast travel everytime, but there's no fun in that either...
    - Besides the incredibly BIG setting, you feel limited at times. I wish I could haev thrown the tomahawk, wish you could choose between leaving the hood on or off with a button, felt limited when switching weapons cause it took too much time for example to pick the horse to be able to whistle and call it. Thought the round weapon invetory system of previous games was easier to use.
    - Too many cutscenes (spoiler): If you have beaten the game, you know that you don't kill the bad guy, you watch Connor kill the bad guy in a cutscene... what's up with that?? - Atmosphere: You never feel quite as "inside the game's world" as with previous assassin's creed games where setting and music and graphics combined perfectly while pulling you into the middle of this incredible world.
    - Short story: From Brotherhood on i have always felt these games are way too short. Being able to explore and hunt for hours or have a lot of fun in multiplayer shouldn't compensate for a short story.
    - Desmond: since revelations he is getting uglier. Looks like a completely different person.
    -Horses: It has always bugged me that you can't go faster when horsebackriding inside a city or town, it is ridiculous. Same with not being able to run inside some taverns, it is way too frustrating to have to walk slow because the game wants you to.

    What i liked about AC3:

    -New running system: Feels more real to run with connor, and it is great to jump between trees.
    -The frontier/Homestead: running through the open field is a charm, you fell free, in contact with nature, away from the noise of the cities and the guards chasing you. It's where I usually hang out when i've had a stressful day.
    -Naval Warfare: In one word: AWESOME.
    -Animals, children: Everything feels much more alive and real when you put animals and children in it. Previously we got to see only adults and horses...
    - Seasons: the depth of snow is great among other cool things about having seasons. And also the rain and thunder is a really good addition to the series.
    - Character development: I agree game starts painfully slow, but it is cool to see how Connor grows up and becomes an Assassin. Although you feel like it is a proggressive development, in the end you feel like you become an Assassin way too fast when you're told "Ok, you can wear the suit now".
    -Peaking through corners: great! only thing left is being able to crouch and move more stealthy.
    -Everything about the landscapes, cities, forests, trees, grass, houses, fences, sky, water... too bad it lags like hell.
    -Locking system: well it's not a great improvement but i like to run sometimes with the close camera, gives it another 3rd person perspective.
    -Blending: great job with this, it's so much simpler to blend almost anywhere.

    There might be other things I'm forgetting right now, but as for now I hope the patch Ubisoft is offering fixes all that it says it will, and I also hope it helps a little with the excessive lag, which is what bothers me the most about this game.

    Thank you for reading, waiting for AC4 now.
    Expand
  18. Nov 25, 2012
    6
    Terrible story, very bad voice acting, pathetic cut scenes BUT a very well designed open world, many side nice missions and challenges and a LOT to do.
  19. Nov 30, 2012
    6
    They managed to take Assassin's Creed and limit the fun parts of gameplay and focus almost exclusively on the story. To put it simply, this game feels like a (boring) movie that makes you do all the leg work. You're probably not playing this game to tie down the rigging on a ship or needlessly escort characters to multiple houses (with no action in between) for a 20 minute mission--butThey managed to take Assassin's Creed and limit the fun parts of gameplay and focus almost exclusively on the story. To put it simply, this game feels like a (boring) movie that makes you do all the leg work. You're probably not playing this game to tie down the rigging on a ship or needlessly escort characters to multiple houses (with no action in between) for a 20 minute mission--but that's what you'll get. This game was a pretty big disappointment. It takes about an hour and a half just to get to the beginning of the real gameplay (where they show "ASSASSIN's CREED) on the screen. Even at the point, you have to start over with another character and do some mundane tasks like playing hide and seek with kids--this is where the game should've started. Expand
  20. Dec 2, 2012
    5
    AC III it's a bad story, a bad character and many bugs, many many bugs. Is this a Beta ? This game is a shame for every fan. The end of the Desmond story arc is just confused. Lame. Boring. But with superb graphics... well... not enough to make a good game.
  21. Jan 12, 2013
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Assassin's Creed 3 is an above average game with some strong aspects. Unlike many of the reviews I've read on this game I happen to think the story line is quite good. There has been a lot of criticism over the story as many people believe it does not present a coherent image of the assassin's order or really develop the story line. However I felt that the game producers were aware that the time period they were focusing on was a story in itself and therefore allowed Connor (the assassin you play as) to obviously be the main focus whilst also allowing us the player to really immerse ourselves in the time period we're playing in. I for one loved the spin Ubisoft put on the Boston Massacre and was equally excited at dodging Redcoat bullets at bunker hill!! So in terms of story line I actually quite enjoyed most of it, although I do agree the finale was a bit dry.

    In terms of gameplay the main story line was brilliant. A large variety of missions to accomplish, a good set of sometimes challenging optional challenges and and intuitive control system allowed me to really enjoy the game. I will say that other reviewers aren't wrong when they say parts of the game can be very monotonous and at times aggravating.

    Now I must explain why I gave the game a rating of 7 when it should be a 9 in my personal opinion. The game is absoultely drowning in glitches!! Some of these are, as mentioned, fairly harmless and can be forgiven for the moment of comedy they provide. However some, are so agonisingly annoying that I was on the verge of writing to Ubisoft and having a right old British moan! For me what really pushed me to this point was a certain information gathering mission conducted on the homestead (stupid Encyclopedia). I was determined to get 100% synchronisation on this latest Assassin's Creed so I reluctantly plodded over to the homestead citizens and started to compile information about their amazingly dull lives! Nearing completion I gritted my teeth and got on with it only to be metaphorically kicked in the privates by a stupendously annoying Dr. White who simply refuses to do anything but two tasks in his entire day. I have researched this massively and there have been many problems with this and to reduce the likelihood of bad reviews from fellow players, yes I have been extremely patient with him. Anyway, I apologise for the end of that review turning into a rant but silly Ubisoft! You've ruined the entire game for me by making the worst mission on the game the most glitchy. Argh!

    So yes, 7/10!
    Expand
  22. Feb 16, 2013
    5
    Many had high expectations for this game. All of that slowly withered away for me after playing as the father of the main character for about 2hrs. Then, when we finally get a taste of Connor, we are basically doing more training missions after we just played for a decent amount of time. The story was still AC esque, this means I didn't enjoy it. Stupid twists and pointless missionsMany had high expectations for this game. All of that slowly withered away for me after playing as the father of the main character for about 2hrs. Then, when we finally get a taste of Connor, we are basically doing more training missions after we just played for a decent amount of time. The story was still AC esque, this means I didn't enjoy it. Stupid twists and pointless missions weren't all too pleasing. Also, the way they advertised the "big war-like battles" was pointless, as we played through about 3 of them, which weren't even long. Although it was overall displeasing I did enjoy how it added new types of missions, enemies and ways of ASSASINATING people. In the end though the new fighting style really pissed me off as it was totally different then the previous 4 games, also the recruits made no sense to me as well as the homestead, I never used them. Finally, I won't say it, but the ending was horrible Expand
  23. Jun 7, 2013
    6
    Assassin's creed 3 is not the perfect sequel AC fans have been waiting for, Dose it live up to the hype? No. It has lackluster side missions except the naval missions), a convoluted story overall, and some game play hiccups. What it dos have is some solid voice acting, and fun combat.
  24. Oct 22, 2013
    5
    I love the AC games and I feel like this isn't a terrible entry but I think they strayed to far from the stealth mechanics of the previous games. And it is way to easy to get out of impossible situations
  25. Oct 31, 2013
    6
    This game might be entertaining, but it is a little bit boring. The storyline is a bit too draggy too. I liked the soundtrack of this game, A LOT. I think ubisoft should not have added 4 sequences of us playing as Haytham, because playing as him is extremely boring.
  26. Dec 26, 2013
    5
    When I started playing this game, I was swept up in Assassin's Creed nostalgia. The gameplay was smooth but refined, and the world was massive. The combat flowed well and all in all the voice acting was very good. After a couple hours of gameplay, I noticed the first issue, the opening sequence is way too long. It took me three hours before I met the protagonist, and left me feeling likeWhen I started playing this game, I was swept up in Assassin's Creed nostalgia. The gameplay was smooth but refined, and the world was massive. The combat flowed well and all in all the voice acting was very good. After a couple hours of gameplay, I noticed the first issue, the opening sequence is way too long. It took me three hours before I met the protagonist, and left me feeling like most of what I had done to that point was just a glorified tutorial. I finally got to Connor's storyline and expected the game to finally pick up, there were a few issues with that though. First off, Connor is boring. He just floats through revolutionary America taking jobs for a bunch of founding fathers and barely has any traits. There may be a scene where he challenges his teacher, but as soon as that's over it's like it never happened. The use of founding fathers is enjoyable for a little, but I like American history, and when this game decides to say, "Paul Revere didn't do the midnight ride, it was Connor, Paul was just kind of there" it becomes annoying. It undermines the efforts of all these real people to promote the protagonist, and it didn't need to do that. Finally, there's the biggest problem with the game, it's boring. There are long stretches of game where you just follow people around and wander between Boston and New York (no Philadelphia?). And while that also happened in AC I and II (and all the other games), at least you were someplace interesting where you could have fun exploring the environment. 18th Century Boston isn't nearly as big or fun as Damascus or Rome, for god sake, if there was a building over 3 stories it was a treat, while in old ones you could climb hundreds of feet in the air. The action is fun, but there is a bit of issue with the technology of the time, namely, guns. In the revolutionary war, everyone owned a gun. Using swords and throwing knives is fun, until you get shot, then you just need to pick up a musket. I think this was a poor choice for setting, because the system worked in the other games. The player would meet some people they had heard of, some people they hadn't and run around getting into sword fights. Here, the player knows all the major characters (or at least I did) and realizes they made them so much less interesting than they were. A conversation with Thomas Jefferson about slavery should be riveting, but he just vaguely talks against it while Connor accuses him of being a hypocrite, then agrees to do some bland chore for him. Along the way, Connor gets shot and has to run around dodging redcoats until he can hide. It just doesn't work as well. Maybe Ubisoft is just spinning their wheels, but this feels more like an uninspired peripheral game than the climax of the franchise (or at least the trilogy). I give it a 5/10, if only because I did like the older games so much. Expand
Metascore
84

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. X-ONE Magazine UK
    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]