User Score
6.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1058 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 12, 2012
    2
    Total disappointmet. To break it down in negative terms:

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

    + None. All the negative ones diminish the ones I - at first - thought where positive.
    Expand
  2. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    Expected much more than I got. It really is unfortunate that they'd incorporate such a bad ending in an attempt to milk the series in the future. Don't expect anything groundbreaking.
  3. Mar 7, 2013
    8
    Assassins Creed 3 feels like a remarkable step forward for the AC franchise. The Countryside blooms with greenery and rural pastures. The cities are bustling and there are some remarkable sights to behold, especially in the new naval battles. The combat is much improved, with advanced AI, demanding strategic fighting acumen to fend off. Unfortunately despite the brilliance, AC3 has the bad habit of giving you excellent missions, with grandeur aesthetics and a palpable sense of scale, right before giving you tedious missions where one misstep triggers an instant failure. Connor is also an emotionless bore, really anchoring the sense of attachment which made Ezio so lovable and endearing. Assassins Creed 3 is a great sequel in a franchise filled with great games. But this isn't the AC we expected, for every brilliant mission comes a handful of truly rote and unfair ones. Luckily AC3 at its best provide some of the greatest moments in the franchise. Expand
  4. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    A fantastic game that is absolutely stunning in the graphic department. The story is really well presented and the environments are huge. Tons of stuff to do and discover.
  5. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    I've got 13 hours of playing the game and my thoughts are a complete mixed bag. I WANT to love this game because I enjoyed prior AC titles AND I'm a huge U.S. history geek. Thankfully, I can say it's not the era of the game that disappoints me as they've done a good job of making it feel as though you're in the colonies and 18th century cities. My disappointment stems, almost entirely, from gameplay changes. |||| First, combat feels like it's taken two steps backwards. Trying to target is an exercise in frustration. The same can be said for melee combat itself where often I find I end up button mashing - something I NEVER did in previous AC games - because the timing of counters, counter grabs, and attacks are WAY off. Ranged combat is just painful in part because of the weapons of the era (yay muzzle loaded rifle reload times!) and because the ranged weapon options are SEVERELY lacking in this iteration. |||| Second, the number and rapidity of cutscenes is ridiculous. Even my wife, who is decidedly a non-gamer, has noticed this fact, commenting on more than one occasion that she thought I was watching a movie, not playing a game. And this is someone who has seen me play damn near every Final Fantasy game for the last 15 years. There are entirely too many portions of the game, thus far, where you run from one "mission" (which was a cutscene) to another mission only to find out that, too, is a cutscene. |||| Third: New Engine equals new fun things (such as ships) but LOTS of bugs. I have died about a dozen times in Frontier because Connor has fallen through a texture - usually by a rock or tree - and then free falls for several minutes before the game considers it a "desync". Climbing objects is also riddled with bugs, especially in urban environments where it's possible for the game to glitch and not recognize a ledge as climbable in one instance but then work fine a few minutes later. |||| Fourth, and finally, the writing is terribly predictable and trite. For a game that forces you into so many cutscenes, it's sad that most of them are yawn worthy and uninspiring. ||| If I could give it a 6.5, I would, but rounding up to 7 would be too high, IMO. If you're a diehard AC fan, you'll be disappointed in the "downgrades" to the combat and Animus systems. If you're a diehard Revolutionary War geek, you'll be disappointed because (despite the ads) that only makes up a small part of the game. If you're a gamer who appreciates a good story, you'll be disappointed by the story and presentation of AC3. It's probably worth a rental, but maybe not a purchase - and certainly NOT worth a purchase PLUS the "season's pass". Expand
  6. Oct 31, 2012
    9
    The AC games have continually improved over time in both game mechanics and also in graphics and the story has always been tops. This game continues that tradition and is easily the finest of them all. After 4 previous iterations they have fine tuned the game play to an impressive degree. More and more is revealed in the overall story arch as you play through the game (don't worry, no spoilers ahead) and the free running in this is stellar to the point of game play nirvana. If you like any of the previous games at all in this unique series you should try this, it will rock you. Great game, I heavily recommend this one. Expand
  7. Nov 20, 2013
    8
    Assassin's Creed 3 is a great time-step forward for the franchise. It brings new characters, familiar moments of American history, sea combat, family rivalry, and the other typical AC franchise elements under one roof. This makes the game more vast and complex than ever before. Sometimes, the complexity betrays itself. I never felt like I totally understood the crafting system well enough before taking to the internet to get some more info from other players that had spent more time with it. The graphics are the best of the franchise on consoles and runs noticeably smoother than previous entries. While the awesome addition of assassin brethren from Brotherhood is still around, it felt way more sidelined and unnecessary to invest in. Other than that, you could make the case that this is the best foot forward AC has made since AC2 and was well worth my time. If I could make one gripe: the free-running mechanics are both improved and broken at the same time. Numerous times I would make leaps or climbs that I wasn't intending to make. On top of that, the British Artificial Intelligence were at times buggy and would detect me while Incognito and just walking down the street. These bits occasionally disrupted the game so harshly that it became frustrating and nearly inexcusable. The good news is that these experiences, while rough and disruptive, weren't too common and seemed to be non issues during most of the main story missions. Expand
  8. Nov 28, 2012
    6
    Meh. I had a hard time completing this one. Graphics were good, fighting was pretty good, sorry was ho hum. The glitches... And so early on in the game. One of the first missions I took cover and flew straight up into the air and fell to my death. Amusing, but annoying from a AAA game. I would say rent it but you probably won't finish it. I expected much better I suppose.
  9. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Nothing revolutionary here. It´s an OK AC game. PROS: -AnvilNext Engine is superb, and, surprisingly, not very glitchy, given the GIGANTIC environments. -TONS of missions. -Commanding your frigate is GREAT ! CONS: -Ultra dumbed-down controls: everything seems automatic. You just press RT and move forward. Parkour inside the houses ? No, no: it´s just a cinematic. -Tree Parkour is great, but since there are no clear visual clues to where you can hop on the trees, you will be, most of the time, riding a horse or walking, A LOT.
    -The American Independence war story and sites are not as appealing as previous AC´s plots. Besides, an african-american as a master assassin and a native-american so fondly helping the founding fathers is too far-fetched.
    -Very cliché father-son sub-plots, inside and outside the animus. You´ve seen this before ...
    -A 5-year-old child can combat in this game.
    Expand
  10. Nov 8, 2012
    4
    What a flimsy, glitchy POS this game is. A shame too, the artists brought their A game, and the people responsible for bugs and game control phoned it in (they probably worked hard, but on their end this game was not ready for ship). Hoping a patch will fix some issues though I doubt it. If you loved AC2, for me anyways this was a disappointment bordering on a stealing 60 dollars.
  11. Nov 2, 2012
    9
    I rushed to review this and I was unfair to it, I criticised it for its very slow beginnings but one this gets going I'm really enjoying it. It's true that some of the missions are unforgiving and it can be frustrating but once youre hanging people from the trees it becomes something else.

    Some will be turned off by the sheer scale of AC3 and yes there are bugs occasionally but all in
    all I'm enjoying this. Brotherhood was the high and Revelations was a disappointment this is doing new things and while it's not perfect and will have its critics I'm glad I bought it. Expand
  12. Nov 7, 2012
    10
    Assassins Creed 3 is a Absolute masterpiece of a game.I've played all the Previous Titles and loved them all dearly enough to keep them in my game collection.But Assassins Creed 3 is by far the best game in the series.the graphics are top notch and the combat is fluid and smooth*almost as if you are the person in the game*movement is better then ever with super realism in every way.the story is very well written and told.the entire game is just FANTASTIC.and the multi player has gotten a good amount of improvements, and is still my fave action multiplayer ever created in my opinion.a must buy for any fan of the series. Expand
  13. Oct 30, 2012
    3
    I am gonna get right to the point here. This game is NOT good. It has some redeeming qualities like the graphics and cinematics. But there seems to be a continuing theme for so many AAA titles. They just want so badly to be liked. They put cinematics and set pieces above everything else. This game is no different. It is basically cutscene, 2 minutes of gameplay, cutscene, 4 minutes of gameplay, cutscene, 3 minutes of gameplay. AND then you consider that the gameplay is usually walking around or riding on a horse. This is pretty bad. The game also starts off incredibly slow. Conner, the main character, is not nearly as likeable as Ezio or Altair, and his motives seem at times either predictable or just iffy. When the game picks up though, you notice just how simplistic the combat is. It is clear that they wanted to ripoff the Arkham games, especially if you pay attention to the music that plays during combat. It is nearly the same exact music found in Arkham City. BUT the combat found in AC3 is no where near as fluid or polished or fun as the Arkham games. Not even close. It fails hard. Glitches also plague the combat, as well as the overall main game. Horses glitching out, muskets flying around, enemies teleporting, some clipping issues, and dialogue glitches are forgivable I guess, but freezing camera glitches and getting stuck in terrain forcing you to restart is just pushing it. Add to this, braindead AI that is some of the worst I have ever seen in a video game, and you have a very pretty game that is anything but good. PLEASE don't be fooled by the marketing. This is a failure from Ubisoft. Not recommended. 3/10 Expand
  14. Dec 15, 2012
    4
    The idea is great. But in my opinion, a game with bugs cannot be considered a finished game. Also I have to complain to being forced to buy additional content if I'd like to play more missions, which of course, is pointless to me if I've already completed the game's main story.

    I was aiming very high on this one, because it's focused on my favourite era, but the results are not worthy
    of an enterprise like Ubisoft. The thing that impressed me more are the ending credits. I can't figure how so many people worked for this... This game is the pure capitalism's expression. Expand
  15. 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. 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
  16. Nov 3, 2012
    7
    As a fan of the series since the first, I was somewhat disappointed. Not by the story/graphics, but the constant glitches. As someone else mentioned, it's not a big deal when the glitches aren't game breaking, like when I walked in to Achilles house and laughed upon being greeted by 3 of him leaning on their canes. But when I somehow get attacked by a wolf during a cutscene and after the dialogue ends, the camera is stuck zoomed in on Connors chest so I can't see where I'm going and have to restart, that's past annoying. This is just one of numerous glitches that made me restart, I really hope Ubi isn't the new Bethesda, shipping glitches instead of games. I had a single glitch in AC1 and 1 in Revelations, honestly, I remember both of the glitches and they weren't repeated or numerous.

    With regards to the gameplay itself, they may as well have axed the viewpoints all together, they don't map out everything as they used to (unless this is another glitch). I can't count how many times objectives disappeared off the map or didn't appear until I was actually on top of them. This actually includes general stores etc. that simply disappeared on the map as well. The map doesn't fully appear when an area is explored nor when a viewpoint is activated. Also, the mission structure is bad imo. Many times I found myself wondering where/what I had to do because some side missions just simply start when you're near a npc and it flashes random text while the npc says "thank you". Thanks for what? Walking up to you? Also, I have a homested mission I can't do, as there are no markers for it since I accepted it and went where I was told. Small gripes about the controls aside (some deaths by falling because the game doesn't recognize handholds on trees that are viewpoints) the actual gameplay is great as always. I spent hours hunting and exploring. Didn't mind hand holding during story missions since the meat is free roam. I actually longed for hand holding in the side missions. =( All in all, I'm a AC fan and always will be, but if Ubi makes shipping buggy stuff like this the norm like Bethesda, I'll do what I do with their games now and buy it 6 months later for less and after the 30 patches that ruin more than they fix. Do any developers have playtesting anymore?
    Expand
  17. Nov 7, 2012
    9
    I should mention first off that I'm not one of the hard core Assassins Creed fans. I've played some of the others and thought they were good but hadn't really gotten into the game until this game. Because of this I can't really compare this game to the previous ones, but I can say this is the only one that's pulled me in. While the story is as good as it always is and the graphics look fantastic its the gameplay that really sines. Its different from other creed games and this will put some people off but I really hope people will give it a chance. Don't get me wrong, the sneaking around parkour building climbing is still here but now there is a ton of other things to do. Whether its exploring the wilderness or getting into the new ship combat, or simply building up your homestead the game is never short of fun enjoyable (and more importantly, varied) quests. On top of that, there are tons of collectables for various people scattered everywhere to bring out the collector in all of us. There are some down sides, such as the numerous glitches that span all the way from goofy to game halting. I've also read that they changed up the combat and I can attest there are probably too many guards with too much health for the games own good. The games AI can be unpredictable as well making the game occasionally frustrating. Barring those little gripes, the game is great. I'm sure some Assassin's Creed vets are going to dislike the changes but I hope they, and everyone else gives this great game a try. Expand
  18. Nov 7, 2012
    5
    I fell in love with Assassin's Creed with the second game, and that game is still magic for me today. ACIII is massive, there are a ton of things to do, but so much of it feels meaningless or trivial, and some of the historical missions are so blatantly forced into the game and so badly done (Paul Revere's ride, for example) that it's amazing to that they made it into a game of this magnitude. There are anachronistic missions and controls problems that seem like they'd more likely be seen in a game with far less of a budget than ACIII had and, overall, this game is a complete disappointment for me. In the two years I waited for this game I never expected that I would have beaten it and sold it back within the first week of release, but here I am. Ubisoft hasn't put out a good AC game since Brotherhood and it's time to find a more inspired series not relegated to the role of cash cow. Expand
  19. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Just played the first two sequences and I am already stunned
    The combat is amazing, every action doesn't feel like separate action but chained together
    The animation engine is really good
    There is some glitches but it's nothing that can't be fix
    10/10 and is surely the best Assassin's Creed
  20. Nov 30, 2012
    9
    Best game in the series, despite no Ezio. The game mechanics, while rooted in the previous versions, this time out are considerably more superior than before, though not completely glitch free. It is a tremendous improvement. This has been the least frustrating and most compelling of the franchise. Side missions for the most part are less inconsequential than the earlier games. I especially enjoyed the naval missions which is a new feature. This is the only game in the franchise where I have completed all available side missions. Pathing for chase missions was the most problematic but those were rare this time out. Also the jump puzzles were not only fewer but more enjoyable since the game mechanic upgrade. Movement is more fluid than before. Would have liked to have had more of the Truth puzzles but since much of the Truth is known by Desmond I can see why there would be little need for them. That is not to say the game isn't full, rich and deep. It is more AC in one game than any of the others. Most enjoyable. Though I feel that Ezio had a little more swagger than Connor but the setting and the twist on history is more than welcomed. Excellent game experience. And that is just the single player game. Haven't even gotten into multi yet. Expand
  21. Nov 18, 2012
    7
    I like the game, i'm a huge AC fan, bought all the games, love the cultural background, I find the timeline in which the back ground fascinating.

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

    If you like AC for it's action packed joyride then this game is for you.
    If you liked AC's historical content, then you'd be better playing the second one
    Expand
  22. Nov 2, 2012
    3
    Normally love the Creed... but really didn't like this game at all. It has so many bugs, online servers offline a lot. forgettable boring characters and the story means nothing to me as an international player. The game keeps talking about people like i should know who they are...

    game tries and fails to rip off Red Dead Redemption. Americans might get something out of this...
  23. Mar 14, 2013
    5
    There's a departure here from the classic Assassin's Creed format. The graphic are slightly improved, the implausible Sci-fi plot remains, and the combat is great. But this like Brotherhood feels more like an excuse to milk the franchise by acting a period piece that is intriguing than a progression of the overall story. Let's not forget that Desmond is the real main character. Yet I'm left feeling that over the course of 4-5 games, Desmond has made no progress as a character. Nor have his supporting players. The main characters suffer for the sake of an ancestor's story. It's becoming frustrating especially since the end is so near." I just keep wondering how many more games they can squeeze out of this franchise. Finally, as I've noted in multiple reviews before, the ending of a game or movie or any story is crucial to how it is perceived. If the ending is bad, that's the last you'll remember of the game. Not just the story was flawed, but the broken final mission as well. As a result, I was left with a "this is it?" moment that was just annoying. Expand
  24. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    AC3 is a all new AC Experience, it has a Read Dead Redemption feeling and the best things that you love on AC series. You watch the trailers, demos and theres no surprise, it is amazing like you saw by Ubisoft. Maybe GOTY 2012.
  25. Nov 8, 2012
    4
    This is the worst Assassin's Creed in the series (I think is even worse than Revelations...). The story of this game is absolute boring, specially the past part wich is the 80% of the game, but the Desmond story was even worse... Specially the ending which is specially bad, not to mention all the bugs that game haves, it feels like an unfinished game. If you want a real AC experience just play AC2 and AC:B instead of this game... About the online part, at fist looks good, but it doesn't have many variety on places to play, and most of them looks the same. Also all the customization parts for characters are overpriced, I already have played like 70 times online, I'm in level 31 and I still doesn't have enough credits to allow me to buy character stuff, only skills.. obviously they want us to spend real money on it, also the rewards (videos) for leveling up on the online game are not good as the ones in AC:R.

    So, I'm afraid this is not an AAA title anymore. Not buying another AC on the release.
    Expand
  26. Nov 6, 2012
    9
    For context - I loved AC2, but found Brotherhood lacklustre and so therefore could not be bothered with Revelations. This is excellent however. It's perfectly developed as a sequel. A new engine gives it visual polish, tweaks the gameplay mechanics just enough to maintain familiarity whilst creating something tangibly new. The new protagonist is great and the narrative very compelling. If you're a fan of the original games, open world or action gaming in general it's a must buy. Also, it has that essential thing a lot of open world games miss, and is very hard to pin down - the world is compelling to explore! I've spent ages just messing around hunting and going smaller tasks - wonderful, and reminds me of the time I spent in Red Dead Redemption. Only complaint is that some elements are a little clunky, such as the menus and insertion of side missions rather arbitrarily. It's a minor issue though, I'd give it 9.5 is I could here. Expand
  27. Nov 12, 2012
    8
    The first 3 hours of the game is spend developing the characters through gameplay, scripted sequences, and cut scenes... but after this the game opens up. Once the game gets going, there is much to do and a lot of fun to be had. AC3 seems a bit streamlined on the control, which you will either love or hate. It is more difficult to fall of a building for example. For me the AC series was becoming too complex, more like a technical button masher, so the more user friendly controls are a welcome addition... and again you will either love or hate it. There is no shortage of things to do in AC3. I like the Homested and save the district from the Templar quests, but that just scratches the surface. There is now Naval warfare which looks amazing and has very good control. Overall the game is possible the best looking game on the XBOX 360. To see Connor walking through the snow leaving a path in his wake creates a level of realism that adds to the immersion of the game. I do not agree with the 9's and 10's given to the game as there are a fair amount of technical glitches... like AI pop ins, person floating in the air, quest person stuck in crowd for a good 30 secs almost making me fail the mission... etc. But all in all the gripes are minor and do little to tarnish what is an overwhelmingly good game. I give it a 8/10 Expand
  28. Nov 9, 2012
    10
    Great game! The new location is a good change of pace than the rooftop heavy predecessors of the series. Combat and the new techniques have good additions too. Loved the AC series and this is a good step for the assassin.
  29. Dec 19, 2012
    6
    The Assassin's Creed series was in desperate need of a change of setting and protagonist. It got one, but the replacements are lackluster. The impressive architecture of Rome/Constantinople has been replaced with 2 story brick houses and the occasional tall tree. As far as storyline, it's as ham-fisted as ever. You're along for the ride at literally every major Revolutionary event but have no real reason to be, all the while being preached at by various characters. Connor, being half-Native American, could have been a really interesting character, but after the introductory sequences his heritage is almost never brought up again. Controls are very awkward, and I found myself getting stuck on small objects and corners, and if I was on a horse is was almost faster if I just went on foot. Combat is simplistic enough that you could probably play it on an old NES controller, which might be a good thing considering how freaking many guards there are walking around. Seriously, it's about a 1/1 ratio of civilians to guards in major towns. The only real bright spots I found were the naval battles (I enjoyed them enough that I could almost see an expanded version of them being a standalone game) and the character of Haytham. Wading through the snow during winter was also a nice touch. Expand
  30. Nov 1, 2012
    10
    Assassins Creed 2 was the series highlight that is no longer true with the release of Assassins Creed 3. The series returns with a new setting, a new character and revamped movement and combat system. This game is set in the time of the American revolution. Your character is the half British and half Native American assassin named Connor. In the beginning you play as Connor's father but I'll try to keep this as spoiler free as possible. Talking about the start the first 3 hours you play as Connor are very narrow and closed. You are funneled down a narrowed path and not given any freedom. But when you are put into the huge open world you really notice the attention to detail and the amount of things you have to do. You can hunt, you can assist strangers, you can just free run through the trees. The revamped combat and movement systems help this experience. The combat has turned into more like an Arkham city experience with a heavy counter focus. This means your using maybe 3 buttons max at any one time. The movement system is even simpler, you hold 1 button to jump, run and vault. It allows you to move more fluidly and you just feel more comfortable holding 1 button. The animation and graphics also must be congratulated. The eyes especially they are just amazing and stare a at you and follow you. In conclusion the Assassins Creed series returns triumphantly with it's best entry so far 10/10 Expand
  31. Oct 30, 2012
    8
    First off, I've got to say how bloody gorgeous the game is during Massachusetts winter months, absolutely stunning. That alone gets it high marks. The combat feels a little clustered at times, especially when most of it is the simple parrying we've grown accustomed to, with the occasional gunfight--but god does it get satisfying to mow through a crowd. Typical AC fanfare here, and if you liked it in the past, it's sure to please now with perhaps the best overall entry in the series. Expand
  32. Nov 28, 2012
    7
    The Assassin's Creed series has always been one for great story telling, impressive graphics and enjoyable game play. Assassin's Creed 3 is a solid, enjoyable game, but fails to achieve the same levels of satisfaction or quality of prior games in the series. AC3 does still have a brilliant story backed up with interesting historical facts (as long as you can learn to read between the lines of fact and fiction). For the majority of the game you play Connor Kenway, a native American who's father is a British Templar. Throughout the campaign you will earn your Assassin's garb, traverse the colonial US cities of New York and Boston along with a vast wilderness, engage pirates on the high seas and assassinate some very naughty people. I commend Ubisoft for their approach to the story, they could have easily turned it into a British hate fest like the god awful Mel Gibson film "The Patriot" but they didn't. They craft believable characters in a believable world, while the main enemy are the Redcoats and the Templars it's not always this clear cut. There are allies and enemies on both sides. Free running is as exhilarating as ever (despite the odd hiccup that will have you cursing), the combat is satisfying but feels dumbed-down if you are used to previous games in the series. Hunting animals for resources and sailing the Aquila Assassin ship on various sea missions add brilliant new mechanics to the series, raiding forts, ambushing patrols and taking on crowds of bad guys are very enjoyable. There are optional objectives for the story missions, some are fun but others just feel so counter productive often coming close to conflicting with the main objective. A good example of this comes late on in the game where you have to chase "Bad guy A", your objective is to chase him down and question him. The optional objective is "do not shove anyone", this includes your target (you have to tackle him, even though tackling and shoving both have the same end result of him on the floor not running). A lot of the time the game also never tells you of certain optional objectives until you have failed them, so this resulted in me chasing him around for an hour while people got in my way before realising I could tackle him.The stealth in the game does take a hit from the lack of a crouch button, you will auto crouch in long grass but as soon as this ends you stand bolt upright which doesn't help if you are sneaking around areas heavily guarded by enemies, you might as well shout down a megaphone announcing your arrival. I never played the series for its multiplayer but I gave it a brief go here and in AC: Brotherhood, it feels solid and makes a nice change from the usual capture the flag and deathmatch of most online games. AC3 is a good game, but if you have played AC: Brotherhood, you will notice how much was removed and ask yourself "why did it take 3 years to make this game that has less features?". If you haven't played an Assassin's Creed game before, this game will definitely keep you entertained but I recommend you play the previous games in the series so you don't miss out on the overall story and in some cases better gameplay. Expand
  33. Aug 22, 2013
    8
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I really loved the WTF! moments in the storyline. These moments remain unsurpassed by any such moments in the original games, apart from maybe the ending to AC1 which everyone kinda saw coming anyway. The Haytham stuff was very well done, and the conclusion to that relationship with Connor seemed both inevitable and tragic.

    The graphics are an obvious improvement on the previous games. I know this as I completed AC: Revelations and then went straight on to AC3. Character models are great and there is real depth. However, there have been buggy moments throughout and I have to wonder if the current-gen is being pushed to its absolute limit, or if we have some lazy debugging?

    I felt like this was a very linear AC game. That I was being led towards the next mission and that any side-quests (and other stuff) was all there as filler. There seems to be very scant reward for doing many of the side-missions and, often, they would just get in the way. This is odd to me as I have always made an effort to 100% these games in the past here, I just don't care and can't be arsed. Maybe I'm Assassins Creed-ed out? After playing two games consecutively?

    Connor is very dull, bless him. I suppose I warmed to him in the end, particularly with the Haytham stuff and the DLC, but when pitched against the mighty Ezio, he is just a sullen boy with confusing morals. I'd have much rather played the whole game with Haytham!

    The whole currency system seems completely broken and money is at a real premium. In the crucible of the New World where there were many fortunes to be made, this seems to be at odds with the timeline. There is no chance of making enough money to buy items and upgrades from your usual activities and missions. So now we move to hunting (not much to be had there) and the very broken trading system. Which is not explained well enough. And in the era of paperless manuals "it's on the disc" things need to be explained really well, people! As did the new assassins guild(?) system which also felt very broken when compared to the silky, seamless offering in Ezio's world.

    I hate climbing trees. I used to love climbing trees as a lad, but not in this game. In fact, I reckon that I could have scaled some of the trees myself faster than Connor's utterly ridiculous jumping around on the spot, or to his death antics that I have often experienced. User error, you might ask? Possibly. But the trigger system of free running often leads Connor to take short breaks to catch his breath so you feel it necessary to push the jump button and then, a few seconds later, find yourself to be bear chow with 97% percent of your bones shattered on an unforgiving frontier ground.

    And bears? WTF? There seems to be one place in the frontier where bears must be respawning cos I killed 6 or 7 of the bastards before I legged it! Did I stumble on Beartown?

    Guns are annoying. It takes away the fluidity from combat that we were able to demonstrate with Altair and Ezio and makes everything too busy for me. Also, is it just me, or are half of the British army in one borough of Boston or New York at any one time? No wonder the British lost the war it's because seven batallions were busy chasing some native kid around the streets of Boston! It seems to become quite unfair too quickly. And given that stealth is often a near-impossible option, the game can become quickly frustrating.

    Desmond. To paraphrase another scribe, "What the f*ck was that all about?" Given that it was a completely unsatisfactory journey, I suppose that it was inevitable that it would be a completely unsatisfactory ending! I didn't mind the modern-day stuff. I actually found jumping around skyscrapers, Abstergo and UFC PPVs a nice distraction from Connor's dull life. And it was nice to see Desmond being quite bad-ass. But the backstory between the Templars and Assassins now seems likely to be shelved for an altogther more supernatural, sci-fi, whatever paint-by-numbers plot in future ACs. The Templars vs Assassins plot was fine for me I didn't really care where these items came from (e.g. Apple of Eden) just that they were powerful, important, and progressed the storyline.

    And Lucy is dead. Well I'll never get back all those hours in AC1 that I spent chatting her up then! And BTW, that spoiler was given out by the production team at last year's Eurogamer when they started their demo with "Yes! Lucy IS dead!" Spoilers, people! The fact that it took place in some crappy Minecraft crossover DLC is a real slap in the face for such a major character in the modern plot. Not good. And the same production team from Ubisoft proudly presented the tree climbing stuff at Eurogamer. I should have seen that coming.

    In conclusion, I found AC3 to be frustrating and pleasurable in fairly equal amounts. Too linear in places. Broken side-quests. Fiddly. But good characters. A beautiful world to play in. Ship battles were VERY good fun, which bodes well for AC4. Liked the stories.
    Expand
  34. 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. 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
  35. Oct 30, 2012
    0
    A series ends brethren! That's it, no more Assassin's Creed in future. I cannot go into details without spoiling, so I just say they pulled off Mass Effect 3 with this game. What a shame to see a legacy end like this. At least the story of Connor was good, whilst the story of Desmond was not. Funny how Lucy was never mentioned, looks like had no clue how to make a satisfying ending.
  36. Dec 10, 2013
    2
    Just terrible. The main character is an idiot; the guards are omniscient to the point that stealth is impossible; controls are poor; the story is AWFUL; and the missions are nothing but frustrating.
  37. Jan 2, 2013
    9
    I've been an AC fan since part 1 & this is the best version since AC2. The combat is close to perfect. The story is interesting. The graphics are great. Yes, I can see how some people would find this boring due to the time period that it's set in and the pacing early on in the game. I'm not one of these people. I loved AC3 from the second I turned it on. I think I'm about halfway through, but I hope I'm not because I love it so much.
    There really is a Red Dead Redemption vibe and that game was amazing, so.....
    Expand
  38. Mar 25, 2013
    5
    This is what happens when the second game in your series is incredible. You have nowhere else to go so instead you throw in chair making and lumber delivery. It then takes various parts of Red Dead redmptions hunting aspect and fails at them on every level, integration and execution. these are just two of the few problems plaguing the third entry in the series. No longer do you assassinate people. That entire mechanic has been so castrated that the game is no longer about it. Compounding this is a serious case of the Kojima's. Overly long cinematics interspersed with a little bit of gameplay. From an artistic standpoint, the game falters from blandness. In AC1 and 2, every local was distinct, in had its own life. This new game misses that, everything feels the same, artistically bland.
    On the plus side, even though the game fails to use its setting properly, the controls show definite promise for use in these environments.
    Expand
  39. 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.
  40. Nov 27, 2013
    5
    My biggest gripe with this game is the disjointed and fractured storyline. It's like they forgot to do some of the cinematic cut scenes that explain how a particular situation ended up. You have to try to gleam from the conversations between your character and NPCs later what really went down when you finish a mission that is important but the details are left out. Game play itself is just like all other AC in my opinion, naval battles are okay, and the trading aspect is pretty stupid. Overall would of had a better score if the story had been checked by someone without ADHD before production. Expand
  41. Sep 1, 2013
    8
    Assassin's Creed 3 is a very well made game with minor issues. The story is engaging and strongly acted. The game's open world is large and split up into New York, Boston, and the Frontier but after finishing the main story there is not a lot of replay value aside from a few side missions and miscellaneous quests. The game play is fluid, but isn't very challenging and has a few camera angle bugs here and there. No spoilers, but the climax of the campaign drags on and then ends abruptly, so I have mixed feelings about it. The visuals are excellent and really immerse you into colonial North America. AC3 will please long-time fans for the most part, but may or may not win over newcomers and skeptics Expand
  42. Jan 1, 2013
    3
    I am going to try to some up all the ups and downs of this game. Unfortunately, there is more downs than ups. My quick opinion, do not buy the game for full price, do not spend the money on the DLC
  43. 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
  44. Dec 27, 2012
    4
    I wish the previews or the notes on the box said something about the missions I've actually had to go thru so far. "Enjoy missions where you... walk... slowly... listening to conversation." Ugh... I get a mission where I have to walk with someone, and listen to info related to the story, which I don't care about. Of course the person I'm to follow is walking slower than my slowest speed, so I have to stop and wait for him to catch up or get a few yards ahead of me. Who designed these "missions" and thought they'd be fun? It would be different if the conversation was clues to the next mission or something, but it's just random jibber-jabber about characters in the story which I'm already disregarding because the cut cenes are lame too! Why do developers treat their cutscenes like they're right out of a movie? We don't get distinct facial expressions or mannerisms so watching 2 wooden characters move arbitrarily while having a conversation is not anything particularly interesting. At least speed it up; we don't have to watch a guy drink a beer, slam the mug down, shake his head, turn his head, then start to speak do we? I'm skipping most of these by now... Also, several times as the game moves along, they will drop you just outside the building you're supposed to go in, then you take 8 steps to enter the building and the cutscene starts. Why not just start the cutscene instead of making we wait for the town to load, and take 8 steps, and then wait for the cutscene to load? Eavesdrop missions are nothing near being fun. Plus if you get spotted by mistake, you have to start from the beginning of the mission, and listen to the same lame dialogue again to get to the part you messed up on. I rage-quit over on these a couple times, because I'd get spotted by someone off-camera and have to start over. Then there's the great "new" addition to the AC franchise: running in snow! It's bad enough I have to commute across the entire map to get to the next mission, accidentally trying to climb every fence and tree stump I get too close to, but when I hit the woods I'm now "running" in 3 feet of snow, and it slows the already annoying chore down to sheer agony. I've been playing for hours, in the hopes that I'll get to something that is fun in this game, but am near the point of adding this to my trade-in pile. AC2 had some great buildings to climb and the dungeon puzzles, which was fun. Instead of that I have a chase mission riding a horse I can barely control thru the woods, and am bumping in to every tree and rock along the way. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but in an AC game I want to be able to explore, collect, and take missions with freedom to decide how I want to play. Why am I penalized for killing someone? Some missions have restrictions "complete mission without killing anyone" in a game called "Assassin's Creed"..? So far, not good... I'm giving this a "4" just on the anticipation I have this game will get better, based on what I enjoyed from previous games. Expand
  45. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    wow.... This game is really fantastic. Great art production, expansive, ambitious, and long as hell.... Best of the series hands down. The open world environment is incredible, the graphics are unbelievable, and the game itself marks a huge shift in the series.
  46. Nov 15, 2012
    10
    Absolutely phenomenal game, well worth your money and by far the best and most innovative Assassins Creed title to date. It's combat, graphics, gameplay, mechanics and story/writing are night and day over the previous Assassins Creed games. It takes the series to new heights and depths especially with Connor's story which is beautifully written and played out. The amount of content and gameplay value this game has to offers makes this a must buy game by many standards, and this may be the best game you play all year. Expand
  47. 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.
  48. Nov 17, 2012
    8
    Though a little bit slow at the beginning, the game gradually picks up, offering you more freedom of what you can do, and how you do it. There are some flaws in the game, and at times I feel like it is too linear, but the combat is fun, and the story is well executed, though not as good as Ezio's. The Mulitplayer is fine, but could use a little more improvement. Overall, I have no regrets spending $60 dollars on this game. Expand
  49. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Assassin's Creed III takes everything that worked well in previous titles, sprinkled in a touch of Red Dead Redemption, tweaked thecombat to be as smooth as Batman: Arkham City, borrowed the cinematic and character development of Uncharted 2, and polished it all off to be one of, if not the very best, game of 2012.
  50. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Look, this game isn't really a 10 but i gave it that score to counter all those negative scores from butthurt trolls that are mad because this game is 15x times better than thier favourite generic shooter, CoD.
  51. Oct 31, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Very boring game, worse in the series. Dumbed down a lot of features. Frame rate is horrible at times. Graphics are al right sometimes but at times you can see it's age but graphics other than frame rate aren't the reason this game is trash. Also Ending is almost as bad ass the Mass Effect 3 ending. Expand
  52. 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. 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. Collapse
  53. Jan 5, 2013
    7
    A Complete mixed bag, the series has become Errand-boys Creed. If you like AC Multiplayer, scripted events, tones of side missions, one button combat (I dont) you will like this game. If you expected engaging missions, story, characters and epic battles and assassinations, like the trailers showed, you will not like it. PRESENTATION - 7.5 - The game world is authentic, however the story and characters fall completely flat. The Native dialogue is also horrendous compared to say, Dances with Wolves or even Pocahontas. DESIGN - 6.5 - There is a lot of hand holding in the earlier missions. While the gameworld is big, side quests plenty, they are mostly pointless. You hardly ever need to buy weapons or upgrade because the game is so easy. With more visual and gameplay glitches than ever, this is the most unpolished and linear of the Creed games. GRAPHICS - 8.0 - Water and weather effects stand out here everything else is starting to look dated, cutscenes are not as well produced as ACII or ACIIB. AUDIO - 7.0 - The lack of Jesper Kyd can be felt here, with a soundtrack more reminiscent of Inception. VO is fine, but the native VO is terrible. GAMEPLAY - 7.5 - Dumbed down and unengaging in every way. There doesn't seem to be any AI at all. The highlights by far are the sea battles, very theatric and intense. LASTING APPEAL - 6.5 - Firstly, the multiplayer, aside form the game world seems to be the best developed section of the game. I find this disheartening since AC for me has always been about the campaign. Sadly, this game is a complete bore, without such a good multiplayer, lasting appeal would have been a 4.0. Expand
  54. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    Nothing can top this game, amazing cinematically, compelling story line, immersive combat are only few of the many features Assassin's Creed III brings to the table. Game of the year for sure!
  55. Dec 20, 2012
    9
    Let me tell you a bit about this franchise first. It is without a doubt one of the gems of this generation of gaming, deserving all of the praise it gets from the fans and media if not more. It introduced so many good ideas that to this day have not been implemented perfectly into a complete game yet. Assassin's Creed 3 is no exception. But at least, it comes pretty damn close. It provides the series with its most refreshing game since the first one, albeit lacking polish were some of the fundamentals were executed so well in its past iterations. The main problem with Assassin's Creed 3 its the fact that it was so overhyped. J blame ubisoft. Promising so much, wanting to give so much more, that it almost forgot what the series was all about. Scripted Missions, dull main character and an overall lack of polish make this game feel like it had the opportunity of being so much more than what it is. Where are the little canoes for exploration in the frontier? What happened to the great sense of freedom we had in prior tittles? Not to mention the many bugs present and glitches the game has. All this makes for a sense of lack of polish. Makes it feel like a rushed tittle. Makes it feel... lacking. All of that missing for what could have been a game for the ages. But this game does have a great storyline (albeit with its terrible ending) great side quests and loads of replayability. Not to mention an excelent multiplayer experience. This is the best assassin's creed yet. But not at all by far. Assassin's Creed 2 was a better step forward than Assassin's Creed 3. Expand
  56. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    Ive been a fan of the assassins creed game since the first one, so i was pretty exited to get this game in the mail. but the overall experience was to be honest disappointing. Pacing was off, glitches and clipping, choppy frame rates made it hard to swallow. The game does have some positive qualities, but its not redeeming. "anyone remember the chase sequence with hickey?" This one is defiantly the weakest assassins creed to date, definitely trading this one in. Maybe next time Ubisoft... Expand
  57. Jan 10, 2013
    5
    Looking for an Assassin's Creed game? Go somewhere. In previous AC games you had to eavesdrop, sneak and silently Assassinate bad guys. Not anymore just grab a musket and go guns blazing in the field, sneaking happens only a few times, and eagle vision are only used twice. The key word in the title of this game is "Assassin" but you never assassinate anymore. There are of course new characters, but they are so poorly made its sad, you will find yourself liking the bad-guy more. the only thing that saves this game is the naval missions. and that's it, the controls are really basic, "RT+RS forward" and the game plays it self.

    TL;DR? this AC game is so casual it's on the same level as CoD, Angry Birds and FIFA
    Expand
  58. Nov 1, 2012
    5
    Disclaimer: I have not finished the game, these are my impressions after playing around with for a couple of hours and going through possibly the first 30-60 mins of actual content. I am hoping that the rest of the game helps me reassess and give it a higher mark.

    This game is proving to be a major disappointment at the moment. The franchise was in a dire need of a shakeup because the
    formula after revelations had certainly become stale. However, this game while trying to break the mould really suffers from poor implementation and in my humble opinion its been released at least 2 months too soon. It's glitchy, i had my graphics go completely blurry the first time i was asked to take a pistol shot and had to quit the game for it to be fixed. Camera angles during sword play are wonky, especially the first sword fight you get in which i guess is kind of a tutorial, you end up losing sight of your opponent when you knock him down. I got desynchronized in the fight coz my opponent somehow managed to fall into the ocean when we were fighting inside the ship!!! (graphics are crazy).

    The control system feels clunky and the smooth swordplay of the previous iterations has completely disappeared. You cannot hack and slash, and each button press leads to an attacking sword thrust. This can only be done when facing an armed opponent, because it is an integral fighting mechanic, you cannot slash thin air and you because fighting is dependent on there being a foe present ur never going to miss. The dodge and counter is an attempt to mimic Rocksteady's Batman franchise, with red indicators appearing over the attackers but neither is the mechanic explained and even when you get it right the fight seems clunky and not at all satisfying. (Granted i am still getting used to it, but it just feels really clunky).

    A lot of control has been taken away from the player, free running has been dumbed down and this results in it just feeling clunky. Plus since you hardly have control anymore its really random what areas you can climb and what areas you can't. And sometimes there is no good reason why you cannot climb some areas. Attacking civilians has been prohibited and you can no longer just start fist fights with them too. (I haven't been able to at least). Silly and frustrating Gimmicks Floating almanac pages, wtf? its a silly gimmick but the worst one is the new lock picking mechanism. OMG, if you thought lock picking in Skyrim was frustrating then welcome to the crude rip off that is Assassins Creed 3. You need to rotate both analog sticks in a manner that your fingers and hands are in the most unnatural position ever and then mash right trigger. If you are unlucky and just move your fingers a fraction you need to start again and there is a time limit to boot. Its frustrating and uncomfortable, I wouldn't be surprised if people sue Ubisoft for causing them Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

    The story (disclaimer still stands) so far is just meandering along, its like setting the base for what is to come and in all honesty i am like 90% sure where its going and if it as predictable then not only is it dumb but completely unnecessary. IGN points out that the first couple of hours of this game are just boring and while playing it i tend to agree. The paying customer would have been better served if these sections were shown to the player as a mini series promoting the game launch aka Forward unto Dawn. Imagine having to play Lasky's childhood before controlling Master Chief or imagine having to go through boring tasks as Ezio's dad instead of the fun stuff Ezio the teenage boy did. The story just doesn't have the pace, wit and character that Ezio's had in its early moments at least. All in all am persevering with this game at this moment because of the money i have dropped on it and the hope that it gets better. If this had been the first game of the series, I would have given up on it.
    Expand
  59. Dec 21, 2012
    3
    This is one of the worst games i have "played". I use that term loosely as its really just a lot of cut scenes stitched together with a little bit of runnning about in between. And the cut scenes are really boring. Graphics are great. Controls don't work very well. As others have said you may fall asleep while playing so sit in a comfy chair! I prefer to be entertained and enjoy the game. This was a massive let down Expand
  60. Feb 7, 2013
    5
    Seriously... I haven't been able to finish this game. It is one of the least entertaining things Ubisoft has spat out lately. Boring, boring, boring... This used to be a sandbox game about stabbing people and climbing interesting buildings. Now it is a game about building villages, chasing pigs, sailing and making some crappy caravans (who the hell created that mechanic??). Cities? Gone. Interesting fight system? Gone. Everything that used to be fun in AC2 and Brotherhood gone. Yeah... The frontier setting looks nice but it gets old pretty quick when every single mission requires you to run to the other end of the map. Not to mention bugs. The one that was VERY annoying for me was that the fighting style didn't change when you switched from tomahawk to dagger. It was hilarious to see Connor HACK his enemies with a dagger in hand. I mean... who the f... let this thing out of QA?

    It is quite disappointing to see Ubisoft fall so hard on it's face on this one. This was supposed to be a crown jewel but it FAILS completely to live to it's hype. All the good things from AC2 were wasted and it is very obvious that a different team did this piece of crap.
    Expand
  61. May 8, 2013
    6
    I really wanted to enjoy this game. But there are very large flaws in it that prevent me from remembering it in a positive light.

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

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

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

    I wanted to like it, but in the end, I didn't feel like it was worth the hype. Not by a long shot.
    Expand
  62. Dec 15, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed III really has certain aspects that make it amazing, it is beautiful, the story really draws you in (you'll actually care about your objectives), and it has some really creative ideas. I rented the game even though I had heard some very colorful choices of words about it. I though they were all exaggerating, naturally as I thought the ability to make a disappointing Assassin's Creed game wasn't technologically possible yet. I was wrong, this game is a huge disappointment when compared to it's amazing and ingenious predecessors. The combat wasn't terrible but it was very limiting and confusing because of the LACK of things to do and choose from. Upgrading was a huge part of AC2+ and was one of the best parts of the game, collecting rare and powerful armors/weapons to fill my stores intrigued me. Don't get me wrong, it is definitely still possible to get different weapons and OUTFITS, but it is a pointless waste of time. The game is piss easy if you have a double digit IQ, run from enemies until your health returns enough to slaughter 30-40 enemies with ease. I found only 2 missions challenging me in any way what so ever, the one where you kill Pitcairne and when you are chasing Charles Lee in the final mission. But more then just challenge you, they jumped you, they are missions that will be the breaking point of many players due to the fact the game doesn't prepare you for any sort of difficulty. Not to mention the lack of choice on our part about how to go about the missions. In AC2, you literally got to choose how you did every single mission, there was multiple ways to do them all. But in AC3 you have 1 set mapped course you practically HAVE to take or you'll absolutely fail. The art was beautiful though most of the time, but I found myself cringing at the sudden implementing of playstation 1 graphics at some points, such as when jumping through the window to get the guy planning Washington's assassination it literally looked like something off a playstation 1. This is only one of the many points where it surprises you. It's not a game breaking problem obviously as the beautiful world outside those couple points plenty makes up for it. But I felt it was worth mentioning. There is of course the story which was very very creative in my mind except for Connor himself. Connor came off as EXACTLY what everyone called him, Naive and gullible, and overall blind to the world around him. He quickly switched sides with a few kind/harsh words and was very quick to anger and betray. A single thing out of place and he immediately assumed the worst and never investigated further, and even if the investigating was done for him and handed to him on a silver platter he would still hold hostility towards the person that he had a misunderstanding with. Overall the worst assassin to date, possessing no qualities and a VERY disappointing ending. At first I thought he was going to forgive Charles Lee and make himself look at least a little good. But it is also clear in the story where he got his stupidity from as his father was openly shown betrayal by Charles Lee and still defended him with his life. But other then the unlikable characters, the overall story was okay, the betrayal by Haytham was interesting, considering an assassin traitor was only mentioned one time before in the first game, and NEVER has an assassin betrayed the assassin's for the templars (obviously excluding Lucy as we'll never know her true intentions considering we found out Juno who killed her is now clearly untrustworthy.). The climbing/free running mechanics which were supposed to have been smoother and better controlled, were terrible to say the least, I often found myself running up a wall 5 feet away when chasing someone and taking the slow route when climbing over things (yes I'm aware of pressing A right before you get to an object makes him go over it faster, but the timing needed is crazy if you don't get it JUST right you'll end up jumping into it and making it take EVEN longer. Over all this game is nothing compared to it's predecessors even though it had some awesome new features there were a ton of bad ones introduced as well. Expand
  63. Oct 30, 2012
    2
    Its the same **** all over again! The gameplay and fighting is still way too easy and gives no challenge at all. Each year a "new" Assassin's Creed with new City but still the same boring Gameplay. If you played AC2, you should leave the franchise and never play any AC Game again.
  64. 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 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
  65. Jul 22, 2013
    0
    The game is horrible. I am so disappointed being a AC1 hardcore fan. I rated AC1 10/10 AC2 9/10 and I am giving AC3 0/10.
    Initially the game felt good. But then I realized that there isn't much to do. Story is boring. Anyway to cut a long story short people that rated 7+ /10 are obviously unfamiliar with AC 1
  66. Dec 3, 2012
    8
    Assassin's Creed III is a thoroughly enjoyable game. I really enjoyed the American Revolution setting and the brand new game engine performs fantastically. The new series assassin, Connor has a very brutal and fast paced combat style utilizing a host of new weapons. A favorite of mine is the rope dart which can wrap around the necks of enemies allowing you to pull them down or even hang them from a tree. This title's world is also far more expansive and gives you more side missions and activities. Players get a Homestead now instead of a castle or fort and like in previous games it develops as the game progresses. The story starts off very slow but picks up with a nice little twist to get you engaged. It's very fun to participate in key events of the American Revolution including events like the Battle of Bunker Hill. Lamentably the story slows down at the end and the ending leaves a little to be desired. Overall this game is fantastic and should definitely be played! Expand
  67. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    Boring!!!! No fun factor whatsoever. I keep waiting for this game to get better but it just isn't happening. I don't usually review games before I finish them but people need to be warned that this game does not live up to the hype. I will finish the game because I want to know what happens in the story and I do love the series but it will be a struggle. The first game is still the best and in my oppinion they continue to go down hill from there. If this had been the first game in the series I would never have bought a second one. Expand
  68. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed has lost it's edge in my opinion. The spectacle is there but the specialness (for lack of a better word) is gone. The setting is different this time around and I appreciate that but the formula is basically the same. Don't get me wrong, the series is still passable and (almost) worth $60 and I'm going to keep buying them but with a little less joy and excitement. Yearly releases is only hastening my exasperation. Remember Me is going to be the next Assassin's Creed and will hopefully add a surge or energy to this stealth/memory genre. Expand
  69. Dec 4, 2012
    2
    I was severely disappointed in this game. The glitches were immense, the AI was ridiculous in never letting me hide. The story was ok...but the ending kind of sucked.
  70. 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
  71. Nov 7, 2012
    7
    This game gave me a very conflicted reaction -- I very much wanted to like this game, but I think its main issue lies in the setting. Whilst an Assassins Creed game set in the American Revolutionary War -- filled with tree climbing, tomahawks, horse riding and killing redcoats -- may have sounded like a good idea (and could have been transferred into a working game well, too) unfortunately this is not really the case. Both Boston and New York's buildings are all only 1 or 2 stories high (not including a few church house spires). A lot of the buildings are set far apart as well. All of this makes the free-running and parkour -- an initial selling point of the series -- feel kind of disjointed and lacking. I think they tried to compensate for this with tree climbing, but this too feels a little disjointed and the only places to practice this are out in the wilderness on rabbits and foxes -- not very mind-blowing. Another little superficial flaw for me was the style of the buildings -- America at this time was a new country, so all of the buildings are small stunted brick and wood houses. This is kind of a step backward from the sprawling marble and white stone vistas I am used to from the games before. This is not to say I do not like this setting (I adored Red Dead Redemption) but it does not really fit the series and it's pre-existing themes very well. The ship combat also felt not needed and very underwhelming. I did enjoy many things about this game however -- as always, the history was rich and charming and some of the scenery did take my breath away. Seasons were a neat change and hunting was a fun little feature. Connor lived up to his hype and was a great guy. The story was vast and fantastic and the ending was immense. However, gameplay should come above all these things, and the parkour and combat both felt disjointed and unfitting. Assassins Creed 3 is a decent game. Pick it up if you have the time. Expand
  72. Feb 7, 2013
    9
    By far my favourite assassins creed game. The combat is great the visuals also, the new location is defiantly my favourite setting. Connor Kenway is a great new character and his story is awesome. A few bugs here and there but not game breaking. Great game buy it now.
  73. Nov 1, 2012
    8
    I'm a big fan of the AC series, and overall this is an enjoyable game, but with a few hiccups. I'll start off with the issues I've encountered and that is a few bugs and glitches. Fortunately nothing that has been game breaking, but annoying such as your horse running into an invisible wall randomly on a path. And other little things that are weird, but funny such as people walking on air. Otherwise I haven't had any that have made the game unplayable. Also early on the game you are limited to what you can do, and that is common in all AC games, but it takes about 3-4 hours to finally get to a part in which you can explore and do things on your own.

    That said, there are some things this game does well to improve on the AC formula. The biggest one is the environment feels lively and breathtaking. The Frontier is beautifully and fighting off wolves and bears are fun, and makes it easy to get money. The time frame is something I personally enjoy as I love the Revolutionary War, and meeting people like Samuel Adams, John **** and taking part of the Tea Party, Paul Revere's ride, the Battles of Lexington and Concord, and so forth make it exciting, and the way they presented these events is amazing to say the least. Finally the missions overall have typical AC affair in which you constantly fighting people, but they added some new missions including naval battles and helping out people to build your community. Some of these missions are quite unique and breathes some fresh air into the series. Furthermore, the naval battles are epic and exciting to take part in. Finally the combat is more challenging now, and sometimes it's easy to get overwhelm and you take a lot of damage quickly if you don't time your attacks well. Furthermore, the new weapons and counter moves allow you to pull some cool and quick kills that make you feel like you are Jason Bourne. Overall, this is a good game in which you'll get your money's worth due to all the side missions and exploring you can do. Also if you are a history buff that loves this era, then you'll enjoy taking part of famous battles and seeing things play out.
    Expand
  74. Jan 24, 2014
    3
    I loved AC2, and I enjoyed Brotherhood. I consider those two games the height of this series. But something was clearly lost after Brotherhood. I may piss some people off saying this, but Revelations and AC3 are utter garbage. There is almost nothing good about those two games in my brutally honest opinion. This whole "Those Who Came Before" plot line was novel and interesting in AC2, but in AC3 it has become pointless and feels like it should have been wrapped up a game or two ago. Combat again becomes simplified, and the game lacks interesting side stuff like the glyphs in AC2/Brotherhood. The main character is boring and uninteresting. At a lot of points in the game, you play for 5 minutes then watch a 10 minute cinematic. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but when it happens this often I get annoyed. And, much like AC1, the voice actor for the main character is atrocious. AC1 was still enjoyable because it was an ambitious game that brought a playstyle into the industry not really seen before other than in Prince of Persia. But AC3 is the fifth installment in this franchise -- the gameplay is no longer a saving grace for bad voice acting, cheesy dialogue and a bad plot. I've heard AC4 is significantly better than this game and I sincerely hope so. I was severely disappointed with this title, as I also was with Revelations. If you care about the story, play the game for plot progression's sake -- otherwise, there really is no point in playing this game. These are just my opinions, and not objective criticism, which is a distinction I hope you make while reading my review. I loved AC before Revelations, so it's just an incredibly disappointing game for me. Expand
  75. Dec 30, 2012
    8
    Assassins Creed delivers in a way that Call of Duty cannot. Open world opportunities, stealth action, a Single Player mode worth playing, a cinematic theme, and incredible gameplay.
  76. Oct 30, 2012
    8
    Not what I was expecting from what I thought could potentially be the 2012 Game of the Year. From all the pre-release footage I saw, it looked like the series had gone through some heavy refinements, namely in the combat. However, it's really not that much of a difference. It's certainly more streamlined and brutal, but it's still pretty much centered around parrying attacks and going on a killing chain. That's disappointing. I expected it to be more like Batman: Arkham City where the combat has a good mix of attacking and countering, but it wound up being too much on the countering side again. I sure hope this is fixed in the future. As far as the story goes, Connor's is expertly-crafted, but Desmond's... well, let's just say Ubisoft Montreal has managed to pull off a Mass Effect 3 ending, possibly even worse. I'm utterly shocked that the ending to Desmond Miles' legacy this game portrayed was even considered by the writers. It legitimately pissed me off. Not enough to ruin the game, but definitely enough to put an utterly bitter taste in my mouth. The audio and visuals are top-notch, so I can't complain there. All in all, this *is* a good game -- it's even a great game -- but it's fallen into the same traps that all the other past titles have, even if not quite as much. Problem is, it fell into some new traps, creating a very inconsistent experience. It should have been the greatest Assassin's Creed title yet. It's one of the weakest. A game worth buying, but not with a $60 price tag. Expand
  77. Nov 17, 2012
    7
    Assassin's Creed 3 - which is actually the fifth game in the whole story arc - is said to be Ubisofts biggest game to date. With huge anticipation and expectation from fans, can Ubisoft deliver on the revolution they have promised to the franchise?

    Continuing right after Assassin's Creed Revelation left off, Desmond Miles and crew has set camp in an ancient cave where Desmond can relive
    the life of his ancestors. In the new setting of the colonial America, we follow Connor, a Mohawk Indian who will become the next assassin. Compared to all the protagonists, Connor is the weakest of them all. He is short spoken, never in a positive mood and is just overall an un compelling main character, but without spoiling anything, Connor is not the only character you will play as.

    To be able to walk around 1700's Amerika is impressive and also as beautiful are all the forest. Its just a shame that the game has to load so often and these frequent loading screens will break the immersion. Gameplay wise, Assassins Creed 3 is much of the same. You can still climb the rooftops of Boston and New York, but its not as fun as in the previous games. The colonial America dosn't have as high and fabulous architecture as the Italian renaissance had. But to make up for it, you can for the first time in the franchise to climb on trees. Sadly, it dosent have the same flow as climbing buildings which can make it annoying.

    The multyplayer is back and its good as ever. To be able to find and sneak up on your target before another player kills you have never been so heart pumping and fun. With perks to unlock and new gamemodes like Wolfpack - Assassin's Creed version of horde mode - will make you come back many times.

    Probably the best addition to this game are the naval battles. To controll your ship, navigating the winds to catch up on your foes and then take them down with your cannons might be the best moments in this game. But with everything new, the game has lost focus of one of the most important aspects. The assassination. It has become less about finding an killing your target before getting seen. There is still some of that in here but not as much as it should.

    Beating Assassins Creed 3 can take you 20 hours or so and more if you spend time completing side quests and playing the multyplayer. Even if the setting is nice, sailing your ship through dangerous waters and playing the multyplayer, there are many aspects to discourage players. It takes to long for the game to really begin, it can feel repetitive, the loading occurs to often, the economy system is broken and Connor is sont fun to hang out with. But despite the flaws, Assassins Creed 3 is still a good game. Its not the masterpiece we had hoped for but it is still fun to play. But dont feel surprised if you feel to play the older instalments instead.
    Expand
  78. Nov 5, 2012
    6
    This game could have been a 9 except for one major problem.

    Bugs... lots of them. I have had to restart numerous missions because of bugs freezing missions, causing me to be stuck in the world, or causing some kind of failure.

    I could even accept the confusing and crappy UI in places, particularly in trading and crafting which is barely explained and way more complicated than it
    should be. I even accept that there are going to be some glitches in an open world game.

    But the number of bugs in this game is far too great to be excused.
    Expand
  79. Oct 30, 2012
    9
    While the combat system was clunky at first until I adjusted to it, I find this a much better game than the last two outings we've all experienced. The sence of adventure from the time period itself is exquisite and the engine is phenomenal. You really can't go wrong--if you enjoyed the other games in the series, despite their flaws, then this one should blow you away! Side note, the lockpick system, while rarely used, is an epic failure. I deduct .5 for that alone, bringing this to an 8.5 rounded up to a 9! Expand
  80. Feb 26, 2013
    5
    One of the most frustrating games I've played. When it works it is brilliant and exhilarating; far too often, though, it feels simply like work. A chore. This is largely due to the fact that most side missions serve no purpose other than time filler (sea missions being the exception and the true high point of the game), and to the variable glitchy, twitchy controls--seems that at key moments the designers decided to slightly alter the control command for no apparent reason, and you end up failing full synchronization. Or in a final boss battle when suddenly you have to learn an entirely new control command scheme to succeed. At any rate, when i finished this game it was with no sense of joy or accomplishment-- just a grim determination to finish something I started. In other words, work. Expand
  81. Nov 11, 2012
    6
    Single player:
    Games are basically interactive movies at this point. In a movie, you would not have a character get built up like he is going to have one hell of a fight ahead of him and then not have a payoff at the end. That would be piss poor writing (or The Great White Hype). The problem is, that is what this movie does. Ezio was supposed to be teaching Desmond how to become a world
    class assassin. Instead, we get an ending with no payoff for all the work Desmond has put in. Just a bland ending to the "trilogy".

    Multiplayer:
    Some refinements have been made to the multiplayer. If you liked the previous installments, chances are, you are going to like this one.
    Expand
  82. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    GREAT GAME!! If you enjoyed any of the previous AC games this is a must own. I love how it weaves AC and American history together for a great experience. I am not done with it yet but I do have about 4 hours into it and so far everything is great.
  83. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    People need to stop trolling, it's really makes me sad seeing trolls giving this game 0's without even stating one valid reason, this game isn't perfect but it's the best this year, way better than ohter rushed games that surprisngly, got better scores than this.
  84. Oct 30, 2012
    5
    Another year and another Assassins's Creed game which basically plays itself. Yes, making a game to hard and challenging can frustrate people, yet making it too easy will bore them. Good game design means finding a balance between those 2 extremes. And it's might be just me, yet I take a little frustration over boredom any day in a game. Because managing something that was difficult leaves you with a feeling of accomplishment, finishing something that was boringly easy one the other hand just leaves you bored. And a game isn't supposed to bore you, causing boredom is pretty much the opposite of what a game should do.

    Or maybe you are one of those people who enjoy to cheat in multiplayer games, or usually run through single player titles in god-mode, because in that case this might be a game for you. For those who require a little challenge in order not to grow bored with a game, better look elsewhere.
    Expand
  85. Nov 10, 2012
    6
    While this was my second favorite AC game in respect to the story, I was disappointed by some major aspects of the gameplay. I do not think it was necessary to have a ridiculous number of homestead quests while the world was full of glitches. Ubisoft could have fixed those and saved us from the monotony of those side missions. Falling through the world and having achievements broken to the point of needing to replay the entire game are not fun (only to name two of the many mentioned by others). This game could have earned a 9-10, but overlooked problems hurt how this title will be remembered. Time outside of the main story was spent in the wrong places. If you are a huge AC fan, wait to buy this until they fix the problems or you will risk having a poor experience. Expand
  86. Jun 7, 2013
    5
    I scored this game a 5. And I think I am being a little generous in doing so.

    The reason I believe that is because this game seemed to have looked at the prior AC games and everything they did (all the improvements made and all the feedback given) and then promptly ignored it all.

    The game starts you off as probably the most interesting and fun AC character ever, Haytham Kenway, and
    then at the end of that section of the game hits you with the two by four in the face revelation that shock! Haytham was a templar all along! *facepalm*
    The delivery and telegraphing of that particular fact was seen a mile off, and when it finally game out it was done in such a hamfisted way that I physically rolled my eyes.

    You are then shifted onto the Connor sections of the game. And from there the whole thing just rolls downhill until its inevitable car crash at the end.
    Connor's youth VA is stilted, and incredibly fake sounding; and the impetus for his revenge was delivered in as pointless and hamfisted a manner as the Haytham-is-a-templar "revelation" it was eye rollingly bad. And he gets no better as an adult. His adult VA isn't as poor but honestly that is no saving grace as the adult "Connor" is the single dullest most annoying character I have ever seen (and I have sufferred through Adoring Fan in Oblivion).

    When Connor isn't being dull, he is being a pointless douchenozzle. And his miraculous involvement in every single major historical event surrounding the independence war period defies belief. It gets to the point of immersion shatteringly bad.
    And then Connor's arc ends, not with having to fight your father Haytham (who was the Grand Master of the Americas Templar Order) but fight "General Lee" his second in command... Which doesn't make sense considering the impetus for the game is to stop his father and the Templars.

    The game does do a better job of communicating the type of person that Desmond is. It shows him as rather brave and heroic and he comes off as pretty likeable. And the Desmond sections of the game don't feel as irritating or annoying in this game as they did in prior games; but I am unsure if that is a function of Connor being so dull that even Desmond looks better in comparison I don't know...
    And then we have that pointless car crash of an ending. I mean honestly what was it with 2012 games ending with 3 all having horribly stupid endings? Dear god.

    Moving onto gameplay. None of the improvements that Brotherhood and Revelations made to the gameplay seem to have made it into this game. In fact it seems to have gottten worst because the devs seem to be trying to portray Connor along the lines of the Wizard archetype (with all his techie stuff) and over complicated the whole thing and implemented it all incredibly poorly.
    There is literally no point to going onto roofs at all in this game. And combat is a frustrating and irritating slog. The guards seem to be psychic; and the controls seem to be back to being twitchy and overly sensitive as they were in AC1.

    The only part of this game I loved (and it seems to be universally loved) is the naval sections of this game. I bet I am not the only person in the world who said "I want a pirate game with these naval mechanics!"
    Evidentally I wasn't because we now have AC4: The Black Flag due out (less than 18 months after AC3 is not a good sign though) which centres the entire game around that mechanic.

    This game... Buy it because you want the complete collection. But honestly it isn't worth suffering through.
    Expand
  87. Nov 10, 2012
    9
    I thought that this game was amazing. It is a little slow at the beginning and it isn't until a few hours in that the story actually begins to pick up. Aside from that though i have not had any problems. I had a graphics glitch occur once in the woods but aside from that no major bug issues. The game is very fun and the multiplayer is awesome. The combat system has been changed a little but i feel it is more satisfying. I would recommend picking up this game if your a fan of the series or if you just want to get into it. Expand
  88. Nov 29, 2012
    4
    The game is boring and annoying, two very very big problems. The gameplay has improved, making combat more fresh and movement more fluid and natural, unlike the stiff movement of previous installments, NAVAL BATTLES are absolutely BRILLIANT, fun, exhilarating, and very fresh, but that's all that's good. Exploration becomes a chore, as building climbing no longer has the awe it possessed in earlier titles, tree climbing is not interesting enough to fill the gap found in the lack of buildings, lock picking is absolutely TERRIBLE, tunnel exploration is tedious, dark and very annoying horse riding is slow and flat, not allowing for much maneuverability. Hunting is something different, but ultimately players just won't commit themselves to much hunting. Now on to story, extremely disappointed. Flat story, nothing new, nothing emotional, bad and boring characters, the only likable character is the villain, haytham. Connor is boring, too serious, lacks the charm Ezio had, lacked the bad-assery of Altair, and lacks the conviction and intelligence of Haytham. Achillies is annoying, discouraging and lacks purpose. DESMOND. His story ends STUPIDLY AND PLAIN ANNOYINGLY, IT'S SO STUPID I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT. Ultimately, AC3 tries to be fresh and introduces many new and interesting things, but many fail and the terrible story just brings this game down to a very bad score. Expand
  89. Dec 12, 2012
    8
    Well, we waited a while, and here it is. First, the good. Within the limits of the architecture of colonial America, the game is gorgeous. Not as impressive as Europe or Turkey, with their monuments, but its still very good looking. Free running is easier and far less of a chore except that you can't pass within six feet of a barrel without the game deciding that you wanted to jump on top of it. But that doesn't matter much because the rooftops are so overpopulated with guards that you'll be spending most of your time on the ground anyway. Free running though the trees of the frontier is a pleasure, however. Ubisoft introduced a new naval mechanic, which deserves its own game. Finally, the world is huge and chock full of enemies to kill. All that is why I am a bit bemused at the games shortcomings. First of all, it is glitchy. Ok, it isn't a Fallout New Vegas level of disaster here,but I still wasn't able to liberate New York North more than 90% despite having done all the liberation missions. Ubisoft didn't put any view points there in an attempt to force exploration. I hope that they never do that again. I spent an entire afternoon mapping that pain in the rear part of town, looking for what I had missed. I found nothing. Then I gave up and went off to do some naval missions. When I came back, darned if North New York wasn't showing as being liberated. It seems that the game needs to reset before it will register the liberation of that area. Horse riding is a disaster. The occasional horse getting stuck in a watering trough I don't really mind, but I do mind trying to navigate on a horse that can jump fences but that stops dead at every tiny rock. The game also has the irksome quality of trying to hold my hand during missions. In previous games of the series I came to enjoy planning my kills and experimenting with different approaches, but ACIII mutinies whenever I do something it doesn't expect. Like my second grade teacher, ACIII can never resist telling me what to do and punishing me if I do anything else. Do anything that the designers didn't intend you to do and your game is likely to end. Full synchronization has become a way for the game to punish the player for not doing exactly what the designers think he should. It becomes a terrible bore very quickly. The combat system, which Ubisoft had nearly perfected in previous installments was badly dumbed down. I found the "time stopping" after a parry to be tiresome in the extreme. What, Ubisoft? it wasn't easy enough to begin with? The true strength of the AC franchise is its narrative and characters, which is one of the biggest reasons that I find myself a touch disappointed with AC III. The plot is, in a word, absurd. The overarching themes of liberty versus order and familial attachments versus perceived duty are satisfying enough, but the narrative strings together some pretty ridiculous plot elements. For example, I can't think of a single instance in which a Mohawk half breed with no experience with the military conventions of the day ever commanded a Continental Army in the field with no more than a few cursory instructions, which Connor does at the Battle of Concord. Nor can I imagine such a person, possessing zero nautical training, ever succeeding to the command of his own warship. Which warship, by the way, he keeps tied up behind his house as if it were a ski boat. These roles required years or decades of experience, which could not be acquired in a frontier basement. A guy like Connor might eventually make a decent platoon leader, but casting him in the simultaneous roles of brigadier general and ship captain is just too over the top to be believable. I appreciate that Ubisoft seems to have an agenda of inclusion, but if they are going to do that, then it has to work. The Connor persona doesn't work. The rather jarring notion of a person like Connor ever encountering the Assassins, much less becoming one, is something that could have used more exposition because, as he is, the Connor character requires too much suspension of disbelief. Too, Connor's naivete is as breathtaking as it is inappropriate for an assassin. He has no particular stake in the Assassins' mission.. He is all about his own parochial motives. In short, he just doesn't have the feel of an assassin. Ezio's story was immersive and compelling. Connor's story is a cartoon, and the problem stems from the fact that Ubisoft seems to have no vision of the assassins' order in the first place. We thought they did, but ACIII reveals the existence of an identity crisis regarding this franchise. The American Revolution might have lent itself to an AC story, but ACIII is not such a story. All that said, while this game is not exactly a jewel in Ubisoft's crown, ACIII is fun to play and worth the purchase, but ACII still remains the best of the series. Expand
  90. Nov 3, 2012
    5
    Let's get this out of the way first thing. How does this game stack up to it's predecessors? It's worse than every other Assassin's Creed except Revelations. Here's the details. The game starts off with a 5-7 hour tutorial. It will range from mildly interesting to mind-numbingly boring. When the game proper finally starts you get turned loose in the world. The world of Assassin's Creed 3 is probably the least detailed of all AC worlds. The cities have very few buildings worth climbing, and tend to look pretty much the same (i.e. the cities have no separate identity). The frontier suffers from Skyrim Syndrome. It's big, but it has nothing in it. Hunting is a waste of time and adds nothing to the game. The end of the game is a huge letdown. Climbing has been streamlined to the point where just pushing up will get you to the top of anything. There are no really cool secret locations to explore. Objective markers will hold your hand in the most annoying way. It's not all bad though, Ship combat is fantastic, and if this game had been Pirates Creed, we'd have an obvious GOTY. Your interactions with your manor are much improved and more personal. The Desmond sequences are very well done and probably the highlights of the game. The villain is actually a pretty interesting character. Combat has been given some tiny improvements which make the combat feel a little better, but it remains extremely easy. The story is typical AC stuff. Really AC3 comes of as a forgettable game. It's not bad, or great. It's a good game which no one is going to look back on and think "That game was awesome." It's one truly fantastic part is the ship battles.Some people describe it as a flawed gem. It's no gem. It's a copper penny. And you won't even remember it in a year. This all being said, it's worth playing to see the story's end. I wouldn't buy it full price though. Rating 7.3/10 Expand
  91. Oct 31, 2012
    10
    Only idiots would score this game a Zero. Aside form a few manageable bugs this game is a big improvement from the last game, specially the graphics. The environment is simply stunning and the combat is better
  92. Nov 8, 2012
    7
    what seemed to be the best game of the franchise turned into the worst of the main trilogy. The game was clearly rushed to be released during the holiday season, and it has so many glitches and bugs it's not even fun. Even though the story is pretty good and good action, the gameplay and combat are both a lot more fluid... the setting fails, buildings are only about 2 stories tall, they are like 500 meters apart from each other, which will have you running/on a horse/parkouring more than the actual length of the sequences.

    The biggest complain is the glitches to be honest, this game has the best soundtrack (tied with Brotherhood) but it has more glitches than the first one, and this is not acceptable, not in 2012
    Expand
  93. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    i am so confused...i am playing ACIII!!!!???i am a member of "ASSASSIN`S CREED" or playing as a regular "low-life" killer???!!???
    gameplay is good as same,with improved control and PATH-FINDING,lots of bugs but still well-design world,story is great with deep holes;i think tree-walking is not as good as building-walking in past ACs.
    still i like "ALTAIR" more that any other protagonists
    in AC.
    CONNOR is believable and grows less sympathy than "altair and ezio".hunting is cool but earning money will kick you... in middle of playing.naval fights are awesome,command and shoot,handle and fire(i like it so much).
    main missions are superb but sub-missions are weak and un-lovely.enemy AI is dumper in my idea compare to past games.
    still experience cheap deaths with anger!!!!!!!!
    "ASSASSIN`S CREED III" is still so good to me but there are so many changes in it,it is so different from AC1,it seems to me new game but i am playing it as "ASSASSIN`S CREED".
    pffff...i do not know i like this game or not?.......i like this game but i love AC1....desmond is the only BRIDGE with past for me here.
    Expand
  94. Nov 7, 2012
    8
    I have loved the Assassin's Creed series since the very beginning for 2 reasons: 1 - The fun and addicting parkour and assassinations. 2 - The astounding degree of detail put into realizing these worlds. From the Crusades to Renaissance Italy, and now Colonial America. AC3 follows the series' tradition of beautifully designed worlds with NY and Boston built to invoke an atmosphere that really sucks you into the game, while the gorgeous Frontier is the icing on the cake. The cities are a little dull to look at, lacking the beauty of Florence, Rome, or Constantinople, but it fits since these were in fact ugly cities at the time. The gameplay is relatively unchanged save for the combat which employs a Batman-esk combat system requiring timed counters and attacks. It's nice to see the formula changed, but once you figure out the the counter-disarm combo, it's gg no re; the enemies are still not very bright, however they show signs of improvement. The story is split between Desmond in the modern day and Connor in Revolutionary America. Desmond's story is just as dull as before, but does it's job of providing a framework for the series, although the way it ends is so absurd and dumb that it makes me sad this game came from Canada (I'm Canadian if you can't tell :P). Connor on the other hand shows more promise, offering a much more intriguing look at the war from the prospect of an outsider. My personal gripe with it is that it didn't do enough. I expected a game that truly portrayed the desperate struggle of the Native American people at the hands of the British and the Americans thereafter. While the game shows some promise of that, it was not enough for my liking. Apart from that, it accurately displays the Founding Fathers as they were; basically a bunch of fed up white men who preached freedom and offered none in return to those who weren't white. The story is interesting, but by the end it falls apart failing to deliver the climactic triumph, or any triumph really, of the hero, his enemies almost seeming more worthy than himself by that time. The game has a lot of side stuff to do, but the only really good one is the naval missions, which are for me the best part of the game. The weather engine is so beautiful that waves drastically alter the flow of combat and force you to make split-second decisions in the heat of battle in order to survive, demonstrating the true ferocity of war at sea in a way that I personally have never experienced (and I love naval games). The multiplayer for me is hardly worth mentioning; if you've played Brotherhood or Revelations, you've played this: a brilliant concept with loads of potential let down by poor balance resulting from skills gained at higher levels and randomness deciding most games. AC3 is definetly worth your time, but don't expect it to break any new ground, simply stand high atop ground the series has already claimed...kinda like what the Americans did to the Native Americans ;P Expand
  95. Aug 15, 2013
    7
    I have been a fan of the Assassin's Creed series since 2008, and played all the console releases so far. This entry in the series shows why the series is so great sometimes, spectacular views, fun combat and nice diversions. But it is a highly flawed game: the main missions force players to do their tasks in a certain manner, combat is frustrating(have to hit a single enemy three times to a row to kill him, should you stop they heal) and the main lead is a rather dull character. But its still a game worth playing, just know its a frustrating and tedious. Expand
  96. 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
    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
  97. 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.
  98. Nov 8, 2012
    5
    A once fresh and promising franchise has been reduced to a slog through frustrating gameplay, odd design choices, and bad dialogue in this latest game in the Assassin
  99. Nov 11, 2012
    6
    If I were to rank the games in order I would put assassins creed 2 at the top, brotherhood second, assassins creed 1 third, this game 4th, and revelations 5th. The game could be summarized as mediocre. Setting: The main story contains large detailed maps, but the problem is that it doesn't have any large buildings to climb like in assassins creed 2 and brotherhood or even revelations, not only that the game doesn't have that beautiful setting like Venice, I really loved Venice in assassins creed 2, it's a very colorful place, plenty of fun things in the game. Puzzles. Assassins creed 2 had tons of puzzles and they revealed pieces of a truth that was really fun. Every time I completed one i looked at what I've gathered to add more to this truth story, more importantly the puzzles had history to them and conspiracy theories, it actually gets pretty creepy. Brotherhood did the same but not to the same extent. So far I have not found anything like this, but I'm guessing they didn't do it...

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

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

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

    Overall it gets a 6/10. It has a lot of problems but nothing makes it unplayable.
    Expand
  100. Nov 1, 2012
    0
    This is the Assassin's Creed we've all been waiting for. Incredible and focused storytelling, wonderful and engrossing new environments to explore, refined and visceral combat; ACIII is ambitious, huge, and very entertaining. The only thing holding this incredible experience back are the technical problems. I think that, with ACIII, we've finally seen what the Xbox can push out. ACIII is incredible graphically, but the poor draw distance, multitude of bugs, strange/annoying glitches and the fact that some mechanics just don't work is just inexcusable, especially coming from such a high pedigree. It's a shame that after four big console releases the AC team refuses to add that layer of polish that would have made ACIII no doubt one of the best games of all time. Not that it isn't a good game, AC3 is filled with content to explore, secrets to uncover, and story to be unraveled at an expert pace. AC3 is a rough diamond. Collapse
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. 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]