Average User Score: 6.1Dec 23, 2012AC3 is an exercise in frustration. I know that I am in the minority here, but I hate this game. Which is shocking, considering that I love the all of the other AC games (yes, I even liked Revelations despite its flaws). I feel that the Ubisoft Montreal has been trying to pack more and more activities into each iteration and this has taken focus away from the core mechanics put into place in AC1 and refined to perfection in AC2. Not that I minded the extras built into each chapter, I just found that Brotherhood and Revelations were veering into territory that moved away from what made AC2 great.
AC3 has obviously been designed with the 'more is better' school of thought in mind and I for one am getting tired of the focus on quantity over quality. In this case, less would have been more. The characters are worthless (including Connor and Desmond), the story felt hacked together like the writers had no idea where to take the series after Ezio, and the missions are rubbish (despite what reviewers are saying). I can only think of one or two that were actually entertaining. Oh, all of the praise that is being heaped on the 'naval' missions - it is essentially Sid Meier's Pirates but more modern. Not one thing in this game is revolutionary and despite all of the raving going on about how it is an achievement for the series, I actually found that AC3 is more linear and less entertaining than the first AC game, just more awkward and confusing. Combat is rubbish, pathfinding is rubbish, running around the forest is NOT fun after the first ten minutes, the cities are bland and not very fun, there is no room for your character to grow, items in game are super expensive (seriously, 24 bullets costed 2000 pounds? Really?). The list goes on...
Why are people raving over a game that really should have taken a critical lambasting for being lazy and rushed?… Expand