Assassin's Creed III Xbox 360

User Score
6.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1205 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. 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. 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.
  3. Oct 27, 2013
    6
    after a very disapointing game(assassin's creed revelations)there wans't how make a worst game,the story of assassin's creed 3 can be good but the rest of the game isnt so good.
  4. Jun 24, 2013
    7
    This game had a lot of hype surrounding it. It was suppose to reinvent the world of Assassin's Creed as we knew it. Did it succeed? Well, sort of.

    The game is very interesting, don't get me wrong. However, the primary issue here is a lack of centralization. There are so many things to see and do, but none of them are particularly interesting. The main story is bland (especially the
    This game had a lot of hype surrounding it. It was suppose to reinvent the world of Assassin's Creed as we knew it. Did it succeed? Well, sort of.

    The game is very interesting, don't get me wrong. However, the primary issue here is a lack of centralization. There are so many things to see and do, but none of them are particularly interesting. The main story is bland (especially the story surrounding Desmond), the gameplay can be mundane at times, and the game just doesn't feel as tight as the other entries.
    It's a great game, but it does too much with little focus on any specific aspect.

    There are two things that really make this game great:
    1. The sailing segments are awesome, full of intense combat and excellent atmosphere.
    2. The sound-track is amazing, boasting some of the best tunes in the Assassin's Creed franchise.

    Give this game a try; it might just click with you. For me, it just wasn't quite as good as the other entries in the series. It is better than Revelations, though. That's for sure.
    Expand
  5. Nov 6, 2013
    5
    Because I trust user reviews over magazine reviews, I waited close to a year before purchasing it in the bargin bin. I wasn't disappointed. This was the worst game of the series. At times the story felt exhilerating and epic, but mostly it felt lame and dull. The large expansive world that they added falls flat when they give you such a large area with nothing interesting to do in it.Because I trust user reviews over magazine reviews, I waited close to a year before purchasing it in the bargin bin. I wasn't disappointed. This was the worst game of the series. At times the story felt exhilerating and epic, but mostly it felt lame and dull. The large expansive world that they added falls flat when they give you such a large area with nothing interesting to do in it. For a game to have been out for a year and still be as buggy as this game makes no sense. It was as bad as the very first Assassin's Creed, yet that one got a pass because it was the first...this is the fifth game of the series! Way too many redcoats in town that prevent you from stealth. If you jump up on a roof, it's like you ignited a hornets nest and spend most of your time running for your life. Combat it ridicolous now because you regenerate your health very quickly, and so does your enemy apparently as it takes about fifteen hits with your tomohawk to kill them. Some assassin, can't stealth and can't kill. Such a shame because the did a great job with the graphics, Boston and New York, the ships, and the voice acting was the best of the series. Expand
  6. Aug 29, 2013
    5
    [5.8] As with most of the previous installments, Assassin's Creed never learns from its mistakes. The developers improve one aspect of the game, and forget to maintain another. You would expect a skilled developer such as Ubisoft to be able to perfect a game by fifth installment, especially when its weakest elements are the most important to the game.
  7. Rem
    Nov 11, 2013
    7
    I am one of those that truly adored the Assassin's Creed franchise. AC2 was the peak of the series as it showed how you can combine the free running mechanic and still give you an insane amount of freedom. Here in Assassin's Creed 3, that sort of freedom is absent. If you haven't brushed up on your previous games, prepare to get confused as it throws many aspects from previous games intoI am one of those that truly adored the Assassin's Creed franchise. AC2 was the peak of the series as it showed how you can combine the free running mechanic and still give you an insane amount of freedom. Here in Assassin's Creed 3, that sort of freedom is absent. If you haven't brushed up on your previous games, prepare to get confused as it throws many aspects from previous games into the main story. What bugged me the most is that most of the missions in the game are just plain too restricting and tedious. Eavesdropping missions are certainly not a good way to past the time as I recall replaying one mission eight times because I had to play a very specific way. The game tries to make up for this by introducing a huge amount of side activities. Hunting, crafting, looting, underground, and delivery missions are present, but it just isn't any interesting. A couple positives I do have to mention is the fact that combat is more entertaining than ever. Freerunning is also simpler than ever. However the biggest surprise is the naval combat, which are easily the best parts of the game. Yet with obvious improvements even in the graphical department, there are plenty of technical issues in the game, and they certainly annoyed me. Overall Assassin's Creed 3 gets caught trying to do too much with so little. It is easily the weakest entry in the series and a disappointing sendoff to Desmond Miles, not like his story was compelling anyways. Expand
  8. 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,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
  9. 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 haveThe 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
  10. Dec 7, 2014
    7
    Assassin's Creed III's poor combat mechanics are made up for by a game which gives us perhaps the first proper open world in an Assassin's Creed game. The story won't do much for you, neither will the weak characters in it. Multiple environments on land are there to be explored as well as the open water. The introduction of naval combat, hunting and a nifty little homestead make Assassin'sAssassin's Creed III's poor combat mechanics are made up for by a game which gives us perhaps the first proper open world in an Assassin's Creed game. The story won't do much for you, neither will the weak characters in it. Multiple environments on land are there to be explored as well as the open water. The introduction of naval combat, hunting and a nifty little homestead make Assassin's Creed III the first in the series to give us sufficient freedom. Expand
  11. 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'mThere'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
  12. 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
  13. Dec 14, 2013
    7
    Having played AC 1 and 2, I was unsure of where they could take the series as 2 was an incredible piece of work. The answer is they got very ambitious and fell short. The opening is fun once, and by opening I mean first 10 hours. This game is not replayable, too many very long story sequences of linearized gameplay.

    The good is that this game is beautiful, vast, complex, and has alot
    Having played AC 1 and 2, I was unsure of where they could take the series as 2 was an incredible piece of work. The answer is they got very ambitious and fell short. The opening is fun once, and by opening I mean first 10 hours. This game is not replayable, too many very long story sequences of linearized gameplay.

    The good is that this game is beautiful, vast, complex, and has alot of play time in it. Best part hands down were the ship missions. The free run mechanics continue to work great and further variety has been added to combat to keep it from stagnating.

    Find this game discounted and it will not disappoint, but not a full retail purchase.
    Expand
  14. Oct 16, 2013
    6
    Unlike most people, I actually like this game better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that still doesn't mean that I love this game. As a matter of fact, I have to say that this game is average at best. This game has a lot of the same problems I have had with Assassin's Creed II, but it is still slightly better for other reasons. For one, the graphics have been very much improved.Unlike most people, I actually like this game better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that still doesn't mean that I love this game. As a matter of fact, I have to say that this game is average at best. This game has a lot of the same problems I have had with Assassin's Creed II, but it is still slightly better for other reasons. For one, the graphics have been very much improved. While they are still outdated (not on par with Skyrim or Batman Arkham City, both of which came out a year before this), they are still very good. The gameplay is not too bad either. However, after playing it, I cannot deny its many similarities with Batman Arkham City. That's essentially what the gameplay is as a matter of fact, a toned down version of the combat system in Batman Arkham City. This still makes the gameplay generic like Assassin's Creed II, however, I did love Batman Arkham City's combat system, and I am pretty glad it was used here. The game also has a little more to do in it than Rocksteady's Batman epic, however, most of these tasks are rather boring. Arkham City had Batman solving crimes, while this game has you collecting trinkets for a man you care little about. Naval battles were a nice touch to this game however. It does keep this game from getting too generic like Assassin's Creed II, but considering that they make up less than half of the game's missions, it won't help all that much. The gameplay also still has several glitches, a few of them game-breaking. If Ubisoft really wants this series to be amazing, they need to stop releasing these games with so many bugs in them. The story of this game however, still completely sucks. The present story is still in there, and should be removed from the game entirely. Its plot is confusing as heck, and is still a complete rip-off of the Matrix. As for the story set in the past, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that the story is no longer ripping off any comic books (at least, not as much as the last game). The bad news is now it is ripping off another very good movie. This time, it is ripping off Star Wars. The story has you taking control of an Assassin named Luke Skywalker, I mean Connor (who is essentially a Native American version of Batman), who has everything he loves taken from him, his tribe, his mother, everything. He then goes to a wise old mentor named Yoda, I mean Achilles, to teach him the ways of the Jedi, I mean Assassin. He also learns that one of the main villains of this game is his father named Darth Vader, I mean Haytham Kenway. Do you see where I'm saying it is a Star Wars knock-off? The game still has a very unique setting. I do love how it takes place in Colonial times, which is an era not often explored in video games. I also love how it takes place during the American Revolution, however, that does sort of add to how it is a rip-off of Star Wars, as there is another war between the Assassins and Templars happening along with the Americans and British. In Star Wars it was the Rebellion vs. The Empire along with Jedi vs. Sith. Overall, I'd say that this game is an improvement from Assassin's Creed II, but still not a game that I would call great. I'd say that this game is worth a rent at best. However, if you want something better than this, it would probably be for the best that you skip this game entirely, and spend your money on a game like Batman Arkham Asylum or Arkham City. Expand
  15. 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 IAssassin'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
  16. 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, theywhat 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
  17. 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.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
  18. 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.
  19. Jun 18, 2014
    6
    Assassin's Creed III. Before I reviewed this game I played Assassin's Creed II. Most people seemed to love that game, but for some reason, I didn't. I thought the game was just plain overrated, and was mediocre at best. It's a game that you should really try before you buy. Having played through the sequel now, I have to say that this game has improved upon its predecessor in most ofAssassin's Creed III. Before I reviewed this game I played Assassin's Creed II. Most people seemed to love that game, but for some reason, I didn't. I thought the game was just plain overrated, and was mediocre at best. It's a game that you should really try before you buy. Having played through the sequel now, I have to say that this game has improved upon its predecessor in most of its flaws. So, does this game present a nice rendition of the American Revolution, or was it the right move for this game not to written in the U.S. Constitution? Let's find out. The gameplay of this game is definitely better than Assassin's Creed II. However, that's not really saying much. The game is still little more than Grand Theft Auto set during the American Revolution. It provides quite a bit for an open world game, but is still nothing we haven't seen before. Of course, there are no cars to steal and drive, so you pretty much have to run everywhere. Running in this game can be fun, but it still isn't nearly as fun as stealing someone's car, and driving off. The open world is set in the cities of Boston and New York in the 1700s. There's a lot to enjoy in these cities. There are plenty of missions to undertake, a few mini games, and even some enemy bases to take. There's a lot to enjoy in these two cities, along with the wilderness surrounding them, but none of it will blow your socks off as none of it is anything we haven't seen before. The combat in this game is literally a copy and paste of the Batman Arkham series. It is an improvement over Assassin's Creed II's clunky combat, but it is still hard to excuse that it just stole this from Batman. It has many of the same beat'em up mechanics. The stealth is slightly different however. Despite this, the stealth in this game is actually worse than Arkham's. It can be hard to figure out when the perfect time to switch to stealth is, and when to beat people up. This can detract from the overall experience, and make it much less fun. Overall though, the gameplay of Assassin's Creed III is an improvement upon the second game, but is still nothing we haven't seen before. The graphics on the other hand, have had a huge improvement from the second Assassin's Creed. This time, they are actually great looking. In fact they are on par with many of the games released on the Xbox 360. It is not as good as Just Cause 2 or Grand Theft Auto IV, but it is still a beautiful looking game nonetheless. The characters and environments all look very good and rich with detail in this game. They may not be on par with some of its competitors, but they still look very good. As for the story, that's the only part of this game that has unfortunately seen no improvement over its predecessor. The story in this game is still absolutely terrible, just like the last game. The first thing I noticed after completing the story was how much of the game was a complete rip-off of Star Wars. Seriously, the main villain of this game is actually the main character's father, and his reveal is just terrible compared to Darth Vader's reveal to being Luke's father in Star Wars the Empire Strikes Back. Also there is a war within a war going on between the Assassin's and Templars while the Americans are fighting the British. This is basically the same thing as the Jedi fighting the Sith during the war between the Rebellion and the Empire. Also, the main character once again has everything taken from him, and it is almost exactly the same as Luke Skywalker this time. As for the storyline set in the present, all I can say is this: remove it. Just remove it from this game entirely. It is everyone's least favorite part of the story. It just makes the plot of this game more confusing than it should be, and it is still a Matrix rip-off. Plus, the ending is so terrible! I won't spoil it, but let's just say the main character has to make a choice, and you don't even get to make it for him! Overall, the story of this game is about as bad as a video game story can get. Overall, this game took several steps forward, but then it took several steps back. It is a decent game, but still not enough to take it out of a worth a rent status. It is better than ACII, but still not that great. I recommend this game to anyone who likes the American Revolution. Everyone else should just rent it, and nothing else.
    Gameplay: 6/10
    Graphics: 8/10
    Story: 3/10
    Overall: 6/10
    Expand
  20. Nov 1, 2012
    7
    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. ACIIIThis 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
  21. Sep 24, 2013
    6
    This game is the definition of a major disappointment. It had so much potential to be amazing, and instead we got a very mediocre game. Extremely mediocre honestly. Where do I even start. The combat is stiff and restricting, the free-running is annoying and a step backwards from previous games, the enemy a.i is bad, the map is uninteresting and not even fun to explore and worst of all:TheThis game is the definition of a major disappointment. It had so much potential to be amazing, and instead we got a very mediocre game. Extremely mediocre honestly. Where do I even start. The combat is stiff and restricting, the free-running is annoying and a step backwards from previous games, the enemy a.i is bad, the map is uninteresting and not even fun to explore and worst of all:The game is boring to play. I mean there were a few good moments in the game, but there's not enough of them to truly say this is a good game. The game was so boring at some points, I was nearly put to tears. The protagonist is dull, the main missions are repetitive and restricting, and the map is a chore to explore.The game is beautiful to look at, but that's about it. Oh and I forgot to mention how the game's ending is awful. This game sucks. My rating: 6.1/10 Expand
  22. Oct 20, 2015
    6
    Huge step back from the previous games. Really dropped the ball with the revolutionary war, which could have been way better. No memorable city landmarks or things to climb. Just really not a good assassin's creed race.
  23. 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 assassinateThis 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
  24. Aug 4, 2013
    7
    the assassins creed series is one of the best series in gaming and the previous installments have all been top quality. however this game is probably the weakest of the series. it is not a bad game but it is just frustrating how good this game could have been. the setting of the game is so interesting and full of mystery and history and as the series is famous for their alternative take onthe assassins creed series is one of the best series in gaming and the previous installments have all been top quality. however this game is probably the weakest of the series. it is not a bad game but it is just frustrating how good this game could have been. the setting of the game is so interesting and full of mystery and history and as the series is famous for their alternative take on the events of the past this is perfect for the series. however the game gets off to an insanely slow start. unfortunately there is so much going on this world yet you are stuck running from objective to objective to watch another cut scene as the game sets it self up. this didn't throw me off the game but left a rather sour taste in my mouth as the game often continued along this path. The game does a fantastic job in terms of graphics and the world yet falls short on creating interesting characters. Connor has no where near the charisma of ezio and the supporting cast other than the main villain, Charles Lee are all relatively stale. The game also does a great job introducing new mechanics and aspects of the game that refresh the series. The addition of hunting, naval battles and the almanacs as the collectibles rather than feathers all feel fresh and exciting in particular the naval battles which for me are the highlight of the game. AC3 also does a great job sticking to its roots as it adapts. the changes to the combat feel natural and the counters are still as brutal and bloody as ever.

    AC3 is an enjoyable game but by no means the best game of the series. If the battles between the red and the blue coats had of been completed on a major scale and the character of connor was more likeable then this game could have been right there with AC2 and brotherhood.
    Expand
  25. 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 keyOne 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
  26. 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 thisI 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
  27. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Another year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leavesAnother year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leaves you with a feeling of accomplishment, finishing something that was boringly easy one the other hand just leaves you bored. And a game isn't supposed to bore you, causing boredom is pretty much the opposite of what a game should do.

    Or maybe you are one of those people who enjoy to cheat in multiplayer games, or usually run through single player titles in god-mode, because in that case this might be a game for you. For those who require a little challenge in order not to grow bored with a game, better look elsewhere.
    Expand
  28. Mar 18, 2016
    6
    What happened? AC2 and AC Brotherhood where great games, Revelations was a glorified DLC. But I thought they would make AC3 amazing.
    It had potential, but unfortunately we got Connor (sigh). Couldn't care less for him, even the missions with his father were better than what we got from him. Can't remember much of the storyline and frankly I didn't care for him. The bow and tomahawk were
    What happened? AC2 and AC Brotherhood where great games, Revelations was a glorified DLC. But I thought they would make AC3 amazing.
    It had potential, but unfortunately we got Connor (sigh). Couldn't care less for him, even the missions with his father were better than what we got from him. Can't remember much of the storyline and frankly I didn't care for him. The bow and tomahawk were great. But i just couln't get into it.
    Expand
  29. 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 gamesWhat is Assassin's Creed 3's core mechanic? Is it stealth? No, because if one enemy spots you, all enemies are instantly aware of your position somehow. Even though there's an indicator for how much an enemy can see you, and it's plenty fun to sneak up behind an enemy, sometimes my character would do something stupid because I didn't press the buttons contextually enough for the games liking, and most of the missions don't involve stealth but when they do it's controller- snappingly obtuse. Is it hack and slash combat? Maybe, because there are plenty enemies in one vicinity at once and jumping in there taking them all out Arkham-style is really fun, but the game wants you to be unnoticed, you know, with the big inconspicuous hood and all, so killing everyone that looks at you funny isn't the optimal solution. Is it the naval missions? No, they're awesome in their own right and I love them, but they only appear in two of the story missions. Well done! You've done a story mission! Now you have the pleasure of being able to do something absolutely **** tedious. So no, AC3 has no core mechanic and remains an unfocused and buggy game throughout. The sidequests are dull too, with the hunting not being rewarded with anything but being pretty cool despite that. Let's just take a look back to Assassin's Creed 1, where it's core mechanic was Assassinating, hence the title. It was repetitive and you spent too much time faffing about, but at least it was a game about assassinating with just a set of tools and a target so you can find your own way to take out the enemy, whatever way you would like too. Over the years, the series has added so many more useless gimmicks that the series has become completely unfocused. I guess I should give credit where credit is due, the combat system being fast, fun and intuitive, the graphics are incredible, the aforementioned naval missions are extremely engaging and I really loved them, the new Assassin's Armour is the best one yet, the overall historical accuracy being, well, historically accurate, the writing is excellent, even though the story is conveluted and barely connected to the original Assassin's Creed story-line, the menu's are really well designed, the free-running is the best I've seen in a game, even though it does get a bit too contextual at times, and it's a fresh departure from the series that takes away the scrambled **** from the previous games. However, the scrambled eggs it took away from the previous games that made them less intuitive and focused, it completely dropped the assassinating bit, so this just becomes an unfocused generic action game, whereas its predecessors were quite original at the time and remained fun whilst also being a bit too easy. This one suffers from being a bit too easy as well, I died most of the time because Connor did something stupid. For an open world sandbox game, this needs to be less contextual, because it gets on my nerves when I cant climb up a wall unless the contextual 'Climb up the wall' button shows up. This was a problem with the previous games as well, I just want to be able to run freely without needing to press the correct button at the correct time. As an Englishman, I felt uncomfortable killng my own men, but I just got used to it over time. See, this is also a problem about the game, its set in a war that's only interesting to American Patriots and to no one else. Connor brutalising Englishman because he's not wearing the same colour as them makes Connor look like the biggest monster of them all, especially when you can't exactly demonize people sodding off later on because they couldn't be bothered any more, or maybe I'm just biased. The French renaissance would of been a much more interesting setting, because in 1775 America, there aren't any big buildings to go free running on and the whole running part is a lot less fun. But at the same time in France there are heads being chopped off, the peasants vs. the Aristocracy, there's a much more believable side you can take without being gung-ho American patriot or gung-ho French patriot. Civil wars are much more interesting, oh, what about the American civil war? Where enough time has gone by for there to be cool buildings to jump around on, war is becoming industrialised, and it's the brutal slave-owning savages of the south vs. the freedom fighting civilised north, and there's a war on so there's plenty of killing for your liking, and hey, they could of had mid-19th century Connor bump fists with Lincoln. Sure, the north outnumbered the south 2:1 but it's better than the boring old redcoats. This game is overall a pretty mixed bag, and if you do consider playing it, don't go in with your expectations too high, like I did. If you go into it with the knowledge that it's an average game, you'll come out feeling satisfied. Expand
  30. 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.
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]