35 of 48 people found the following review helpful
This review is from: Assassin's Creed III (Video Game)
I will admit I put AC1 down. I thought it was too repetitive and did not finish it until years later. I read about a lot of changes for AC2, so I picked it up. I loved it. I had a lot of fun with Brotherhood and Revelations. I enjoyed those games for three main reasons: Protagonist, Gameplay, and Story. And those three areas are all sub-par in AC3.
1) Protagonist: Altair was cool. Ezio was amazing. I rooted for him; I enjoyed his wit. Connor is unlikeable. His voicing is stiff, and his lines are kind of sad. He's naive and somewhat dumb. Ezio outsmarted people. Connor is manipulated by just about everyone. As we went through the AC2 trilogy, I could not wait to suit up as Ezio again. I hope to God we're done with Connor.
I suppose this is also the time to discuss Desmond. The modern-day "levels" (I'm being generous) are frustrating and pointless. And I don't care about Desmond's daddy problems, especially since they were so trite and cliché.
2) Gameplay: I will free run through Florence, Rome, or even Constantinople any day. Boston and New York suck. The designers were kind of stuck. The roads in the New World were wider, making it more difficult to sustain above-ground movement. Then the designers made it worse by putting guards on every third building. It completely took away from that aspect of the game. One of the main sources of enjoyment from the last three games was a frustration in this one.
The combat is dumbed down, as is something as simple as sprinting. These are not improvements.
Apparently, the game designers do not believe in what they preach. Assassins promote freedom and choice, but that is not what is supplied in this game. Too much is linear, and (even worse) cutscenes which demand certain buttons to be pressed. And that's it. For example, take Lexington and Concord - iconic, right? What's Connor's involvement? Ride over here and press B. Now ride over here and press B. Now ride over here and press B.
Also, there are far too many timed scenes and chase scenes. The chase scene at the end is horribly frustrating and a huge let down.
3) Story (and some SPOILERS): I'm fine starting the game as Haytham (though the crossing the Atlantic portion of the game was far too long). The plot twist in Boston was awesome. And then it all went downhill. The game skirted the fringes of the Revolutionary War, throwing you into some of it and completely skipping most. Everything was set up just fine. You're Connor, you have a list of people to go after, and it all culminates with a confrontation with your father. Well, almost. See, in another twist, your father is not the last person you kill. We save that for Charles Lee. And in that final confrontation with your father, it's not 1-on-1. It's 1-on-1-on-barrels, because the designers decided it would be cool if you had to counter Haytahm's attacks while standing near barrels in order to advance the plot. And the big final moment ... you get to press X in a cutscene. The rest of the game is bizarre, as you confront Charles Lee at your father's funeral and in front of everyone (but you don't kill him) and then you make it to the worst chase scene in the entire game. Again, in the final confrontation, you do nothing aside from watching a cutscene. It's enough to make one throw the controller through the television.
The only part of the story I did enjoy was the (admittedly sometimes tedious) Homestead series. Building up the area and bringing all of the people there was satisfying. But an optional storyline should not be the highlight of the narrative.
Overall, the series took a step back with this game. I saw in a video interview that Ubisoft wanted to see the reaction to Connor before putting him in another game. My advice: move on. Please.