User Score
6.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1048 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. Oct 31, 2012
    6
    First of all, let me be clear, I've been an Assassin's Creed fan from day one. I followed the development of every single game since it's conception. I have all the games, all the books, most of the merchandise. I even did some internshipping at Ubisoft to work on Brotherhood. I would go as far to say I'm a diehard fan. This is why, it pains me to say this. Appart from Revelations and the games on other handhelds, this is the weakest Assassin's creed and a blemish on the overall series. Don't get me wrong, it's not terrible and has fun parts, but it's an average game that is part of an overall franchise that stays away from the average. Let me break it down, so you see where I'm coming from and to make it clear I'm not "trolling".

    The Cons:

    The glitches. Oh, the glitches. This game is FULL of them. There have been a few that have made me chuckle, like a horse getting stuck on top of a house or a man stretching out like crazy after I hit him. The ones that really upset me though, where the game breaking ones. Such as guns missing from parts where you need to shoot, being unable to fire, escort missions where the NPC will get caught in a wall, the protagonist just falling though the floor into oblivion, the NPC's shooting through buildings. There's been several times I needed to restart due to a glitch. I'd let some of them slide, but this is an AAA title and there should never be glitches that break a game. This is 2012 for Christ sake. The AI is terrible too. You could be walking down a street, with no notoriety and suddenly five guards will come out of nowhere and kill you. Or you could be super wanted and walk by- even punch a guard- without getting them to attack you. The horse back riding is so bad... oh man. Horses- when shot- will fall over. They'll also fall over randomly when you hit a glich and die. The combat, now different than the other AC's, is like trying to drive a minivan with a popped tire. You'll lose half your health just taking out a group of guys. Guarding and countering doesn't work anymore. And good luck dodging. For some reason Muskets in 1777 are as accurate as sniper rifles now. huh. It starts out slow- I wont say spoilers, but it's about 4 to 5 hours in before you actually get to the meat of the game.

    There all a lot of cut-scenes. It sorta brings you out of the game and it feels, sometimes, like a movie, but overall it's not that big of an issue. Pros:

    It's BEAUTIFUL. More beautiful than AC2 or Skyrim or fallout. This game will make love to your eyes.
    The soundtrack is amazing too. The ship battles. Yeah, it's a learning curve, but it's not terrible. It becomes really fun later-on

    Climbing on trees and free-running are smooth like butter. It feels fresh and natural. Connor is a very easily controlled character and you'll just have fun running around in the forest, The Protagonist. Shockingly, Connor is a really interesting character. Hunting is fun. There's no better feeling than stealth killing a bear from a tree. I can honestly say, as a "hardcore" assassin's creed fan, I was disappointed. I had very high hopes for this game, and I even expected something better than AC2. I'd recommend you play it, but don't go in with the high expectations of the people and reviews that are giving it 10/10 or perfects. I'd go in expecting an average game and you wont be too let down.
    Expand
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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.
  7. Oct 31, 2012
    5
    Alright I have to be harsh here, as I wanted to enjoy this game but so far it has been boring me. Will it get better after 15 hours? Maybe, but so far it has been boring. Controlling your character feels like controlling a drunk bicycle, many times when I wanted to approach a door to open it I would climb it instead. The shadows looks really bad, what is this dotted mess supposed to be? Yes it does look better then the previous games but it Expand
  8. Nov 3, 2012
    3
    I've been a huge fan of the game and series... until now. The new combat mechnics just dont play or feel right. characters wanting to run up a ladder or wall when your trying to get to a hidespot. where was the stealth game-play? So many glitches within the game. with the size of the team they had you would think that they would be able to get a good sized QA team point them out the the coders and artists. the IGC's have really bad animations and lip sinking Expand
  9. Nov 3, 2012
    6
    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
  10. Nov 17, 2012
    5
    I first of all have to say that I had really high hopes for this game. The first AC did not really strike my interest but it did intrigue me enough to give ACII a try and I was blown away. Then ACII:B came out and I was hooked. The combat was fun, the stories were awesome and Ezio was a fantastic protagonist. Then when Revelations stumbled a bit I thought it was just a bump in the road. Boy was I wrong. ACIII comes out of the gate limping. The graphics might be beautiful but they are only skin deep as pop ins and texture tearing is rampant.

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

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

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

    Which brings me to the 100% sync. Introduced in Brotherhood, this was a clever way to challenge players. In Brotherhood and Revelations it was just that, a challenge. In ACIII 100% sync becomes a tedious almost torturous chore and goes to highlight the broken gameplay mechanics and a number of irritating glitches. If I am supposed to kill my target without anyone noticing don't make it so my hidden blades alert every damn guard in Boston! It goes to frustrating even further when you realize that you cannot complete epilogue missions without getting 100% sync, which means that as a fan of the franchise, if you want to see the real 100% ending of the game you have to do the OPTIONAL side objectives. Ubisoft, don't make something optional and then purposely withhold content from the ending of the game. The 100% sync options come off as cheap and lazy, as though the developers added them in at random to flesh out bare boned missions. I really wanted to love this game, so much so that I thought I could hail it as a huge leap for the franchise, much as ACII was from AC. But that was not to be. Instead I came away from ACIII feeling as though three years of development and anticipation evaporated into a cloud of mediocrity. ACIII is in no way a revolution, it is more a slight step forward with a bum leg and an eye patch. Here is hoping we don't have to see two more games of Connor before we truly get the next huge step for the franchise.
    Expand
  11. 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
  12. Nov 10, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I've played all 3 Assassin's Creed, and this is not an Assassins Creed. This is a game with the AC logo and name and a wonky version of its mechanics, but nowhere the depth of the previous ones. AC franchise is built on the ability of the player to visit historical cities and cites through the memory of Desmond's ancestor - but there is not historical sites in revolutionary America. You are no longer climbing century old buildings of masterful architecture, but merely wooden shed of various sizes, and perhaps the top of the sorry box of matches that the colonist call a House of God. There are people who pointed out the clunky combat system and mechanics... I guess they had to change it for the tree climbing in this game, but it seems like they've broken more than the features they've added. And it seems the game was completely lacking in play test due to the countless bugs I've encountered such as unkillable guards, horrid and cryptic lock picking, complete gray screen, and inability to correctly load the game from save files. The story is an utter mess and any small bit of analysis into the main character of Connor would cause the story to fall apart during the middle of the game. While his motivation for the first half of the game is understandable (the death of his mother, the attack on his tribe), the latter part - after which his reason and preconceptions were revealed to be false (His supposed attacker were innocent for the death of his mother and attack on his tribe), the entire latter half of the game became aimless and pointless to the player. Especially so when 1) We as a player knows exactly what happens to Native Indians after the revolutionary war, and 2) His templar enemies specifically stated they were attempting to prevent the very result that we as players know would happen from history. Connor's main reason for his joining of the Assassins was to blame Charles Lee for the attack on his village that resulted in his mother's death, but it was revealed later that Charles Lee was not responsible, and the attack was in fact ordered by Washington. But instead of the player change allegiance, he doggedly pursued Charles Lee to the very end, despite him being completely innocent to the very reason that the main character joined the Assassin's order. The game lacks the depth and intrigue that was the highlight of the AC series. Where the previous games had puzzles with conspiracy undertones, AC3 seems to have fired the writing department and replaced it with mini-game department. There were no overhanging questions about subjective or objective morality, nothing to make the player think about and question the correct view of the world - it was just Connor getting used by Templars, Assassins, and those who came before as pawns. Connor as a main character no longer contains a brain like Altair or Ezio, but became a human shaped murder tool controlled by the player, manipulated by those who held more cards. One also cannot ignore the blatant attempt to portray the French in the happy sunny light - While the British were portrayed as tyrants, thugs, and fascist police organization, the Patriots led by Washington was portrayed as inept, brutish, uncultured. I'm sure the fact Ubisoft was a French company had nothing to do with this though. The game's only salvation was 1) Connor's Father Haythem - a more fitting and respectable character as an Assassin, ironically 2) the Naval Battle missions. If one word could sum up Assassins Creed 3, it world be the word: TOOL. Expand
  13. Nov 2, 2012
    6
    I've got 13 hours of playing the game and my thoughts are a complete mixed bag. I WANT to love this game because I enjoyed prior AC titles AND I'm a huge U.S. history geek. Thankfully, I can say it's not the era of the game that disappoints me as they've done a good job of making it feel as though you're in the colonies and 18th century cities. My disappointment stems, almost entirely, from gameplay changes. |||| First, combat feels like it's taken two steps backwards. Trying to target is an exercise in frustration. The same can be said for melee combat itself where often I find I end up button mashing - something I NEVER did in previous AC games - because the timing of counters, counter grabs, and attacks are WAY off. Ranged combat is just painful in part because of the weapons of the era (yay muzzle loaded rifle reload times!) and because the ranged weapon options are SEVERELY lacking in this iteration. |||| Second, the number and rapidity of cutscenes is ridiculous. Even my wife, who is decidedly a non-gamer, has noticed this fact, commenting on more than one occasion that she thought I was watching a movie, not playing a game. And this is someone who has seen me play damn near every Final Fantasy game for the last 15 years. There are entirely too many portions of the game, thus far, where you run from one "mission" (which was a cutscene) to another mission only to find out that, too, is a cutscene. |||| Third: New Engine equals new fun things (such as ships) but LOTS of bugs. I have died about a dozen times in Frontier because Connor has fallen through a texture - usually by a rock or tree - and then free falls for several minutes before the game considers it a "desync". Climbing objects is also riddled with bugs, especially in urban environments where it's possible for the game to glitch and not recognize a ledge as climbable in one instance but then work fine a few minutes later. |||| Fourth, and finally, the writing is terribly predictable and trite. For a game that forces you into so many cutscenes, it's sad that most of them are yawn worthy and uninspiring. ||| If I could give it a 6.5, I would, but rounding up to 7 would be too high, IMO. If you're a diehard AC fan, you'll be disappointed in the "downgrades" to the combat and Animus systems. If you're a diehard Revolutionary War geek, you'll be disappointed because (despite the ads) that only makes up a small part of the game. If you're a gamer who appreciates a good story, you'll be disappointed by the story and presentation of AC3. It's probably worth a rental, but maybe not a purchase - and certainly NOT worth a purchase PLUS the "season's pass". Expand
  14. Oct 30, 2012
    10
    Game of the Year contender! Frontier hunting + Ship battles = Awesome! The game also has a very good replay value. Graphics are nice. I don't see any competition here. Dishonored = too short. Halo 4 = more of the same. Black Ops 2 = more of the same.
  15. Nov 13, 2012
    3
    I created an account just to echo what people have been saying here. Loved AC2 and this looked so promising... finished the game in just a few days and I just feel let down. Exactly what people are talking about. Gameplay interrupted by cinematics. Glitches galore (horse riding is awful). Forget about the Frontier; it's too annoying to ride through the woods and tree-hop. The new gameplay interface (e.g. for switching weapons, etc.) is for the worse. Bad voice acting. Massive plot holes and poor storyline continuity. Some missions are a total waste of time (i.e. the entire first third of the game before you get your Assassin's hood; all the Desmond missions; and especially the chase missions). You can't even free roam much once done with the game (i.e. run around and cause murderous chaos), because after gaining sufficient Notoriety, the game sends unbeatable Jagers against you that spawn out of nowhere and you are inevitably killed. Nothing like AC2; that game is still a masterpiece, especially when compared to this thing. It's like they had no quality control before putting AC3 out! Expand
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. Oct 31, 2012
    3
    Boring game... 0 Gameplay... Every little part is automatic. I hope, for the next episode, to have an automatic control, so i can only watch the game and don't play it.
  19. 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
  20. 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.
  21. Nov 9, 2012
    6
    Assassin's Creed 3 is exactly what people should have expected. This game should not have been hyped nearly as much as it was. It is just as good if not slightly better than revelations. Don't expect something as innovative, charming, or impressive as Assassin's Creed 2. If you enjoyed Revelations or have followed the entire series and don't mind more of the same with shinier graphics; BUY THIS GAME IMMEDIATELY! But if you are anything like me and are sick of these uninspired sequels to the once great series known as Assassin's Creed; then leave it alone. Don't even wait for the price to go down, just see it as what it is: a cash-in. Expand
  22. Oct 31, 2012
    9
    FIRST POINT - THE GAME IS VERY VERY VERY GOOD
    SECOND POINT - THE GAME ISN'T THE ALL SINGING, ALL DANCING MASTERPIECE IT SHOULD BE.
    Assassins creed 3 is definitely, the best game in the series. The maps are huge, the graphics are incredible, the story is epic, the homestead is immersing, the characters are intriguing, naval battles are a blast and everything has been improved. However
    there are issues. Several bugs are noticeable, and yes frustrating, however UBISOFT have been quick to respond and most have already been fixed. Really it's a minor issue. The game itself is a joy to play. The story is fleshed out and interesting enough to keep you wanting more and the conclusion is satisfactory. Desmond's story is finally given some time in the spotlight, and this time is enjoyable, however could be expanded upon. Some aspects of the game do feel underdeveloped like horse riding and assassin recruitment, but on the whole most aspects have been well developed. There is so much to do in assassins creed 3 that its impossible to mention it all off the top of my head, and this is one of the reasons YOU HAVE TO PLAY IT. PEOPLE WHO ARE RATING THE GAME BELOW 8 ARE OUT OF THERE MINDS. The game is a real treat. If there hadn't been so much hype about it people would be giving it a lot more praise. Expand
  23. Nov 6, 2012
    7
    I have played Assassin's Creed from day 1. What disappoints me about this installment is that i feel let down. From AC1 to AC2 they made drastic improvements to the game and it was a great step forward. With AC3 i feel as if they took a step back. They almost tried to do too much with the game. Instead of focusing on doing things well, they did a lot of things okay. I do not like the characters one bit in the game and Connor is by far the least interesting of all the Assassins and actually quite annoying. The fight systems took a step back and it seems like it takes for ever to kill an enemy. Not to mention it seems like i continually get caught on all the little things in the environment. I constantly find myself running up a tree or a wall when really i wanted nothing to do with them. This is not due to my lack of knowing how to play the game but more because Connor can climb almost anything that just by running by something he seems to be attracted to it and just run up it. I am on DNA sequence 10 out of 12 and overall the game is a decent game. The story is pretty good but i wish i was more involved with the revolution as they lead you on to believe you are, not just some errand boy. It is a above average game i was just expecting more out of it. Especially being that i tried to read nothing about it so not to over anticipate it and give it no chance to live up to my standard. But even with ignoring most news about the game i just feel like there is so much they wanted to do with the game and just fell short a little. Expand
  24. 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...
  25. 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!
  26. Nov 3, 2012
    6
    The combat mechanics definitely took a step (or even 2) backwards. The beginning of the game is extremely boring(specially on the ship. Go talk to someone, then back to your room to end the day. Next day, do it all over again). All the cut scenes really don't help. On the 360 version while walking in the city objects appear out of nowhere (probably because of a low field of view). The older games did not have this problem(maybe because there were a lot more buildings and they blocked other streets so you wouldn't be able to see this problem? But I doubt that. AC/AC2/AC:B/AC:R just didn't have this problem) How you uncover your map is also a pain in the ass. I DON'T want to go EVERYWHERE, I want to climb a tall building and uncover a part just like in the older AC. The story is perfect, but it is annoying to enjoy the story when everythin else is worse compared to the older AC games Expand
  27. Nov 3, 2012
    5
    I think this game seriously suffered from the hype. Amazing new graphics! Biggest map ever! Hunting! Look at all the cool things we can do! The developers lost their way. The little details are great, but the overall pieces just aren't. Best examples: combat is difficult, harder than any AC game before it. It takes forever to get anywhere, because the frontier is huge and the cities are full of guards who seem to be much smarter than they were in previous games. And while I love US history and the story so far, it doesn't make up for the fact that this is a frustrating game to play, just because of how the game is set up to work. I'm sad really. Everyone was expecting a masterpiece, and what we got was a decent game at best. There are some fun parts. But ultimately, if I was new to the series, I wouldn't be coming back. Expand
  28. Nov 11, 2012
    6
    As I was playing Assassins Creed 3 I realised that all of the oranges I had in my fruit bowl had started to go green and furry looking. Like Tennis balls. Tennis balls that emit a strange smell. As a man of science I can only presume that this occurred by way of radiation emitted by Assassins Creed 3. In summation, do not under any circumstances allow Assassins Creed 3 near your bowl of oranges. Expand
  29. Nov 4, 2012
    0
    How did this game get such good reviews? This is probably the dullest and most boring game I've ever played. The first video game where I fell asleep while playing it. The gameplay is chunky and bugs/glitches are splattered all over, the controls are awful, the combat is automatic, everything is automatic. "Don't want to die? Just press a button and you won't." I'm sorry but how do people think this crap is fun? If video games keep going in this direction, we're looking at a very depressing future. On top of that, the "introduction" to the game is very long and pointless. The main protagonist is annoying and stupid. If you love being told you're stupid and to settle for less buy it but if you want a great video game that rewards your efforts and progresses, pass it. One giant casual snoozefest. Expand
Metascore
84

Generally favorable reviews - based on 61 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 61
  2. Negative: 0 out of 61
  1. Dec 5, 2012
    60
    At least the petty indignities of the multiplayer are optional and situated around gameplay that's solid and unique, if frustratingly stagnant. In the single-player campaign, however, it's impossible to escape the ham-fisted manipulations of the Assassin's Creed III development team.
  2. 90
    Assassin's Creed III is a pretty damn fine game. It loses none of what makes the series fun with the translation to another time and continent, and creates a whole new set of experiences which define the franchise. The biggest issue, if there is one, are the small technical issues, but these niggling technical issues only seem worse because everything else is such a great experience.
  3. 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]