Your Thoughts on Assassin's Creed III - SUCCESS? OR NO?

#1 Posted by AssassinsKeep22 (15 posts) -
I think the the new assassins creed, so far, was a HUGE success ----- WHAT ABOUT YOU GUYS?? WHAT DO YOU THINK???
#2 Posted by ABakedAlien (307 posts) -

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

#3 Posted by rigzzsy (349 posts) -

i'm 12 hours in, only on sequence 5 and loving it - specially the hunting

bring on ac3.5

#4 Posted by Fandango_Letho (5412 posts) -

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.ABakedAlien

What? Are you serious? AC's combat was just about you holding the right trigger and mashing X to multi-counter everything. Now, you actually have to engage enemies and fight them. You can't one-shot everybody unless you start a killstreak, which isn't easy to pull off.

#5 Posted by AssassinsKeep22 (15 posts) -
interesting perspective. to be honest i love long responses like that, especially when they are detailed and specific like yours was -- (or its just me being a total nerd). what im trying to say is - you deserve my uttermost respect.
#6 Posted by AssassinsKeep22 (15 posts) -
i agree. i think there has been a HUGE change for the better between the previous AC games' combat.
#7 Posted by JarOfGunz (368 posts) -

I personally loved AC III. I have been a fan since II and the changes in AC III were great. Connor's storyline was fantastic, so was Desmonds, but the ending kinda threw me off. The gameplay experience has been revamped and combat was more epic than previous games. Overall, it delivered on its promise to be a good game and it was a commercial success too!

#8 Posted by LLYNCES (381 posts) -

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

ABakedAlien

#9 Posted by MacMayne25 (17 posts) -
I think they should have waited longer to release the game because of the presence of so many glitches that have been found thus far. Hopefully they update and fix them soon. But apart from them the game is great. Incredible detail and large maps. Love the revolutionary war era, and the climbing through trees is awesome! Dialog could be let monotonous and lame, but i wouldnt imagine a lot of emotion from Connor.
#10 Posted by Slinqy (244 posts) -

It was a partial success for me. Let me give you a few reasons why I thought this game could've been better.

- I will admit that I like not having to hold two buttons down while running. The downside to this however is that it sometimes forces you to run up on things you had no intention of running up on. So, partial good and partial bad.

- Sometimes, maybe about 35% of the time, tripping guards in combat, at least with the H-blades does not work. The animation occurs but the guards won't fall down. Very frustrating at times.

- Now I don't know, it may be different with each person's copy; who knows! But every single time I load in from one place to another my right pistol is replaced with the Putnam pistol. You can imagine how infuriating this can be.

- NPCs will disappear and/or re-appear at times.

- Connor will always assassinate animals with the hidden blade ejected out as a knife. You can't use your tomahawk; only on guards.

- There are only six different color-blends. WHAT?! This is AC3! AC2 had 14 different color-blends to choose from, and we're stuck with only six? People might say, big deal! But when you think about it, none of the color blends are really that great. You got the Master Assassin black and red theme and the assassin red and white theme [Jamestown and NY outfits]. Okay, those two were actually good. The rest didn't seem that great. The blues were alright at best, but the browns were kinda bunk and didn't really match imo. Then there's the matter of the Homestead outfits. Altair and Ezio's outfits are alright to add in I guess, but we've played in them before a million times. Why not give us different outfits to choose from instead of those? I wasn't too fond of Achilles' outfit either. Kinda lame if you ask me. The only outfits I like are Captian Kidd's and Connor's Indian outfit.

Now I understand everyone has their own preferance of colors and everything, but I'm just saying, regardless of preferance, they didn't give a whole lot to chose from when it came to different colored outfits. There's basically five colors to choose from: Black, White, Red, Blue and Brown. Yay Ubi. What about silver, gold, and green? Or what about different shades or combinations of the colors? I thought they dropped the ball in this department. I am simply not satisfied with the selection. There should have been a color wheel available that allowed us to change the color of the two main parts of Connor's outfit. That would've given us much more variety. Black with brown, brown with blue, white with brown, etc etc.

- The story seemed dragged out in the beginning and abrupt at the end.

- Killing Haytham and Lee was unsatisfying considering the manner in which they died. I don't want to spoil it for anybody, but those AC fans who beat the game know what I'm talking about.

- Ubi forcing us to not wear the hood after the story has been completed is the worst thing to happen to us AC fans so far. I really think it is. I am almost forced to wear Kidd's outfit or wear Connor's indian tribe outfit just to stave off the risk of being blinded by ugliness; not to mention you don't feel like an assassin anymore without the hood.

- Sometimes ridiculous and near impossible optional objectives. One that comes to mind is Captain Kidd's treasure mission where you have to kill the wolves without losing 30% health and without using ranged weapons. Okay. The part they don't tell you is that the button prompts time interval are decreased and extremely hard to press in time and air assassinations on the wolves from trees don't work. I bypassed this by taking to the trees and trying to do air assassinations on the wolves. Luckily, the animation allows you to close-kill the wolves right after the failed air assassination takes place. Rinse and repeat. So, basically, the only way I was able to complete this optional objective was taking advantage of a glitch. Not cool.

- We can't equip muskets. This pisses me off so much I can't properly express my anger over digital typing. No seriously, I'm just wondering. Why not? Why can't we? I like to fight with a musket, so why can't I equip it on my back and replace my bow? I don't understand.

- We can't choose our own equipment. What if I don't want to be armed to the teeth? What if I just want to run around with certain weapons and not all of them? I don't really use the rope-dart or the smoke bombs or the mines. I don't care for the bow either. Sometimes the H-blades are better hunting tools than the bow is. And when you can use two pistols that holster four shots altogether the bow is really obsolete. I know why they force it on us though, because it's an identity issue. Still. I would just like to use my H-blades, Tomahawk, and have an equiped musket on my back, with poison darts. That's it. AC fans have been asking for the option to carry only certain weapons for a long time. Looks like we'll have to wait for the next AC again.

- The Brotherhood was a little contrived. We couldn't choose our own brotherhood; they were chosen for us. We couldn't decide what they wore or what they carried for equipment and weapons... I will admit though that the options they gave us for deploying our assassins was a plus.

There's just a lot of little things that really bog down the quality of the game in my opinion. The story, overall, was alright. It was slowed down a whole lot and I had to get used to that, but it wasn't a very big issue imo. Apart from what I mentioned above and all the bugs and glitches, AC3 was really decent. Of course, I was really negative in my response-I didn't talk about the positive too much.

#11 Posted by ABakedAlien (307 posts) -

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

LLYNCES

That's absolutely ridiculous you took the time to critque MY opinion of a game. What are you doing? Trying to say I'm wrong or change my mind? It's almost like you are trying to convince yourself of something. Like holy buddy get a life.
#12 Posted by ABakedAlien (307 posts) -
[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.Fandango_Letho

What? Are you serious? AC's combat was just about you holding the right trigger and mashing X to multi-counter everything. Now, you actually have to engage enemies and fight them. You can't one-shot everybody unless you start a killstreak, which isn't easy to pull off.

That's a common belief that isn't true. If you tapped the attack button at the right time after already having pressed it you would instantly kill the enemy. Basically you could either wait and counter or you could attack by repeatedly pressing the the attack button again on impact to trigger a kill. You could also grab someone at will and didnt have to wait to counter them. It's actually surprising how many people think that you could only counter in the earlier AC games. My 2 real life friends both thought that aswell.
#13 Posted by dandi (359 posts) -

Hey everyone,

I just got the platinum for Assassin's Creed 3 and figured I would give my opinion as well. Overall, I liked it. There were some major issues that I had though. First off, the game felt rushed to me. By that, I mean I encountered a lot of bugs that I needed to use the internet for assistance. Specifically, the delivery missions in certain locations and the final brawler challenge did not show up on the map for me at all. I had to manually access them using screen shots to find the correct location. That was very annoying. I did not like that you were forced to win at the morris and fanorona (possibly spelled wrong) games. I actually had to use a computer program to input Achilles' moves to find out what moves I should do. At one point, I had seven pieces to his one and he still won. Quite annoying. Some of the full synch objectives were extremely annoying. Some that come to mind are the chase ones where you could not make contact with anyone and the naval mission (could have been a privateer one) where you had to kill the three frigates hitting an exposed weak shot. By the time I played that mission, I had fully upgraded my ship. So I had to hit the ships only partially to expose the weak spot. It took forever.

I did like the enhanced gameplay but agree that the running could get sketchy. There were several times during the Lee chase scene where I wanted to throw my controller because Connor would jump left instead of steering left. I was happy that the multiplayer trophies were not too annoying to acquire. I think it was Brotherhood where you had to get every type of kill in one playthrough. No way it could be done without boosting. Anyway this time, the MP trophies were not bad.

I was shocked by the ending with Desmond. I wonder how the franchise will proceed from here. Hopefully they take the time to polish the next game. Overall, I enjoyed the experience but was frustrated at some of the glitches encountered. I look forward to playing with or against you.

Your fellow gamer,

Dandi - PSN: theluh

#14 Posted by Hellcanwait (836 posts) -

My thoughts on ac 3 , too many bugs but the gameplay and storytelling has improved. the battles at sea are amazing and very welcome.

#15 Posted by YTbyExcel (1 posts) -
In my opinion, AC3 is a success in it's own aspect, based on the player's perspective. Here's some key reasons in the game why: * Combat: Combat was GREATLY improved. Instead of holding down the right trigger and just mashing the X button to counter every attack, you NOW have to time your counters and your button pressing at the RIGHT time to activate a counter kill, or you'll end up just pushing your enemy away, and you have to run after them to kill them (Fans will know what I mean when they actually try it). Combat is also WAY more advanced than before, kills are more technical, there are a LOT more variety in the killing animations, there's practically killing animations for everything, run and tackle, the classic stab-behind the back and covering the mouth, duck and roll, stab, etc. Also, the addition of the bow and the tomahawk definitely mixes things up, with the way they show the clash of Connor's heritage. * Storyline: Also, to play this game, you REALLY have to know some backstory to the series storyline to understand it. Ezio is mentioned once in the game, which gives us hints as to HOW Achilles knew about Ezio and how far back did Achilles actually discover about Ezio's life? Does he know about Altair? Does he know about Desmond? Etc, etc. You don't really have to play all the games to know what the Templars are, but you'll be very confused, and wondering, where the hell did I start? What's this cave for? Who am I? Who's that? Who are they? You've really gotta know what game you're playing. Also, the addition of not having the "X" and "Y" button on your HUD and telling you what those buttons do and what their action does, definitely gives you confusion on what they do, unless you've played the PREVIOUS games before. * Clothing The clothing Connor wears DEFINITELY represents his heritage. We all know that. His robes represent his British heritage by how the robes are tailored, and his equipment, the pistol. The bird feathers attached to his arm, as well as his tomahawk and bow, represent his Mohawk heritage, and the way he can climb trees, and other scenery. Also, another thing that TOTALLY ruined the game for me was how his hood was taken down. Totally ruined it. Ubisoft said they were working on a patch to put it back up, but who knows, it's Ubisoft. I had to spend 7 hours just doing ALL the homestead missions to get Achille's outfit for JUST the hood. What I don't like is the blue ball cloth thingys near the sash (if you have the outfit, you know what I mean). I have Ezio's Roman Assassin attire unlocked as well, but I don't like it. There's almost no animation for the cape, and it'd be cool if it wasn't folded like that all the time, it looks like it's made of plastic. As for the outfit colorings, I'd love it if they added a red, blue and white outfit coloring, for the classic patriot colors. The closest thing to come to it is the one that has a light-blue tint, with the red and blue trim. If that light-blue was white, I'd use that all the time. But for now, I'm sticking with the default colors, the Jamestown outfit, the New York outfit, and the one with the black and red, the classic Master Assassin colors. Overall, it's a good game in some aspects, but at the end, totally ruins it for you. Oh, and another thing, if you want a TRUE ending, finish the homestead missions as they correspond with the timeline. When Achilles is sick and in bed, I didn't get that until I finished all the homestead missions AFTER finishing campaign.
#16 Posted by LLYNCES (381 posts) -

[QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

ABakedAlien

That's absolutely ridiculous you took the time to critque MY opinion of a game. What are you doing? Trying to say I'm wrong or change my mind? It's almost like you are trying to convince yourself of something. Like holy buddy get a life.

Somebody challenges your opinions and you get all butthurt.

U mad brah?

#17 Posted by maxp84 (389 posts) -

I liked it... not to spoil... don't read anymore... but i wish there was a bigger angle between lee, haytham and connor.  Like if Haytham started to trust his son and Lee kills Haytham thinking he's turning on the Templers...That would have made the vengeance taken on Lee that much better.   Also they painted Washington as a douche.  Washington should have ordered Lees hanging at once but Lee somehow escapes due to his high influence.  Lee ends up taking on a new idenity working for the redcoats or something. it was too predictable.  I thought there was going to be a struggle between Lee, Haytham and Connor.  I thought Haytham would have gotten upset at Lee for burning down the indian village killing connors mother and haythams woman.  Like a wedge between them.  haytham in the middle.  connor on the assassins side and Lee on the templars side...

#18 Posted by DamianInferno (4 posts) -
I think that it's a success and the gameplay is so much different to the previous games it's just great.
#19 Posted by blkgto (790 posts) -

It is a shallow experience.  I will beat it because it cost me sixty bucks, and I will trade it in.  I did not even finish brotherhood, I found it to be an absolutely terrible game. 

This game has all sorts of stupid bugs and glitches.  I am in sequence 8, and you get stuck on the stupidest things.  I got stuck on a chicken in the middle of the street in boston.  seriously.  a chicken. 

 

The freerunning in the forests is sweet, the side missions are drawn out and extremely tedious.  Freerunning in the city, mostly during missions, i'm thinking of one particular chase sequence, is really frustrating.  It is definitely tighter then brotherhood, but often times he just turns to climb things when you are running.  Its just like people getting stuck on cover in the first gears of war. 

 

Is it a good game?  Yes.  Great?  Absolutely not.  Sixty bucks for a glitched out flawed mess?  Finish the game before you release it.  Add a coat of polish. 

#20 Posted by kohan149 (86 posts) -

  I thought there was going to be a struggle between Lee, Haytham and Connor.  I thought Haytham would have gotten upset at Lee for burning down the indian village killing connors mother and haythams woman. 

maxp84


*SPOILERS*

Did you miss the one story mission when conner returns to the camp and haytham steals the letter from the general detailing the attack against conners villiage to salt the earth? and then they talk about how he did the same 7 years prior?

*SPOILER END*

I liked the game, did not really enjoy the ending seemed like a cop out to me, hated conner so much yes he had some pretty good lines but over all he seemed like a kid. I was really rooting for the templars to win this one, their fight was way more noble and it goes into what society believes today, that the ends justify the means.

I did notice a few animations glitches and the dreaded dual gun weapon switching bug but other then that there really was not as many bugs as I imagined there to be.

what I do not appreciate is ubisoft taking features out of a game. the training simulator for one, they introduced a newish combat system and they give you no where to practice it. the colors were really dumbed down to a basic set. the hood being down at the end, and the biggest one for me was notority it was way to easy to drop it, its like 50-150 to drop 2 notority levels at a town cryer or go to a printer and pay 1000 for 3, I never ran into another poster after the introduction but atleast they would not clog the minimap.


#21 Posted by Roanark (2467 posts) -

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"][QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

LLYNCES

That's absolutely ridiculous you took the time to critque MY opinion of a game. What are you doing? Trying to say I'm wrong or change my mind? It's almost like you are trying to convince yourself of something. Like holy buddy get a life.

Somebody challenges your opinions and you get all butthurt.

U mad brah?

You don't challenge an OPINION.
It's what that person thinks, and challenging that just makes you look like an imbecile because you're just trying to make your opinion look like a fact, when it's not.
It's one thing to have a little debate about an opinion, such as I think saying that the combat of the previous games is better is totally idiotic.
It's button mashing and does not take any skill at all.
Though really the rest of the original points were spot on.
Challenging somebody's opinion is just a waste of time that makes you look self-centered and incompetent.

#22 Posted by rancor_ (140 posts) -

[QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"][QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

Roanark

That's absolutely ridiculous you took the time to critque MY opinion of a game. What are you doing? Trying to say I'm wrong or change my mind? It's almost like you are trying to convince yourself of something. Like holy buddy get a life.

Somebody challenges your opinions and you get all butthurt.

U mad brah?

You don't challenge an OPINION.
It's what that person thinks, and challenging that just makes you look like an imbecile because you're just trying to make your opinion look like a fact, when it's not.
It's one thing to have a little debate about an opinion, such as I think saying that the combat of the previous games is better is totally idiotic.
It's button mashing and does not take any skill at all.
Though really the rest of the original points were spot on.
Challenging somebody's opinion is just a waste of time that makes you look self-centered and incompetent.

Yes. People challenge other people's opinions all the time. That's what discussions or arguments are. People debating using the same fact would be rather monotonous don't you think?
#23 Posted by Roanark (2467 posts) -

[QUOTE="Roanark"]

[QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"][QUOTE="LLYNCES"]

[QUOTE="ABakedAlien"]

Depends on what you define success for a game is. Financially the game is obviously a success. Personally do I like the game? Kinda, as a fan from AC 1 the series has been gradually growing stale for me (the yearly "AC 2" games didn't help). AC 3 is a great assassin's creed game with it's flaws. In my opinion the flaws I've experienced hold the game back from being a truly great game.

What do you mean by "Yearly" AC games? You mean brotherhood and revelations? Brotherhood was a great game and didn't feel "rushed at all" If anything it was better than AC 2 in a lot of ways. A lot of people like having one huge open city instead of a bunch that were tiny. Revelations was medicore in comparision to the rest, but it was still an average title and it was obvious most of the developement time was being put into AC III.

The combat has been simplified and made casual friendly (this doesn't mean easier, it means more simple, there's a difference), which to me is a huge downfall as the combat before wasn't ever that complex but it took skill and was much more enjoyable. It made you feel like you were more in control of the assassins and weren't just watching him fight.

The combat wasn't simplified or "made easier" Literally all they did was take out the need to press LT. The combat was if anything far more difficult in this game compared to brotherhood or AC II in my opinion. I could literally chain kill 30-40 mobs in Brotherhood, at least the mobs in this game actually put up a fight at times.

I found the cut-scenes to be painful to watch alot of the time.First of all the flow between gameplay and cut-scenes is quite poor as there is a loading screen going in and going out of the scene. Although this seems minor it really does disconnect the player from the game. I almost would of preferred just a classic ingame cutscene, instead of trying to make it into a movie. Also I found the voice acting to be cheesy at some points.

I loved the cutscenes, and again, I don't know why you are complaining here as you are in a small minority. I don't know what you are talking about by "disconnect" Yes there were some minor glitches at times with the voice acting being out of sync, but I hardly if ever noticed that or came across that. I thought the voice actors did an amazing job. There were a few "cheesy" ones but you can find that in every game.

The secondary missions are so boring, I mean the main missions are boring enough as they are so linear and there's barely any freedom anymore on how to complete a mission. The only reason I can see someone actually doing all the side missions is to say they completed all the side missions in AC 3 (achievements). Even the hunting sucks as you dont even have to aim! I got bored of it in 5 mins and said "screw it im not even going to bother with hunting in this game".

The secondary missions are not "boring" The naval combat was fun, and the "secondary" missions in this game were superior to the ones in previous games. The only thing I miss is the platforming missions. But the naval combat, trinket missions, homestead missions and liberation missions more than make up for it. I thought the hunting was "meh" too, but that is the only thing I agree with. Also the main missions were great and on par with the previous titles, if not better.

The best thing about the game is the animations and free running mechanics (although again it has been simplified which isnt all bad tho). Running in the trees is quite amazing.

The "Free" running mechanics haven't really been "simplified" It's the climbing that has been made a bit easier as you don't have to actually jump up when climbing now, the game will do it for you. I still don't see that being a "problem" though.

Overall though the game feels unfinished. I feel like they tried to put all these features into the game but didnt take the time to slow down and make sure everything was nice and polished. However I do believe i am in the minority as most casual to even minor hardcore gamers will enjoy this game, as it is definitely not a bad game. I just feel it didn't live up to it's potential and is not a huge successful masterpiece that some claim it is.

Game doesn't feel "unfinished to me" I thought they did an amazing job with the side content and everything else they added. The glitches were a given seeing as how big the game is, though there are planned patches and there has already been a major patch that fixed a lot of them.

rancor_

That's absolutely ridiculous you took the time to critque MY opinion of a game. What are you doing? Trying to say I'm wrong or change my mind? It's almost like you are trying to convince yourself of something. Like holy buddy get a life.

Somebody challenges your opinions and you get all butthurt.

U mad brah?

You don't challenge an OPINION.
It's what that person thinks, and challenging that just makes you look like an imbecile because you're just trying to make your opinion look like a fact, when it's not.
It's one thing to have a little debate about an opinion, such as I think saying that the combat of the previous games is better is totally idiotic.
It's button mashing and does not take any skill at all.
Though really the rest of the original points were spot on.
Challenging somebody's opinion is just a waste of time that makes you look self-centered and incompetent.

Yes. People challenge other people's opinions all the time. That's what discussions or arguments are. People debating using the same fact would be rather monotonous don't you think?

 

There's a difference between debate and just plain one-sided.

A debate would be along the lines of:

"I think the combat now has vastly improved because blah, blah, blah."
Then a valid reply would be "Well I think the previous is better because blah, blah, blah."

Instead it went more one-sided, them picking every single statement and choosing to say it was wrong.
It's all nice and dandy to have a conversation or debate about arguable detail but when you're just straight-up slandering every single point the person tried to make... It's just stupid and idiotic.
And you can not debate opinions such as fun, boring, good, or bad when it comes to something like a game.
Personally I think CoD, Halo, MW, etc. are boring games.
Are you going to turn around and tell me "No those are awesome games because this, that, and blah, blah, whatevers."
Sure, you could, but it'd just be stupid because it doesn't change the fact it's just not my thing.
If I like Pepsi, are you going to tell me I have to drink Coke because whatever else reason? No, that's just silly.
So is this... Trying to jump somebody and tell them that their opinion is totally wrong in every single way? That's just being a jerk, not debating.