IGN: "Huge but inconsistent, Assassin's Creed III is an impressive adventure that succeeds in most of what it attempts."
(Assassin's Creed III, PC, PS3, Xbox 360)
8.5/10
I think IGN are generally bashed a bit too hard for their reviews. I am going to give this review a quick watch, but I doubt it will make me buy the game at launch.
Red the review and liked it! But the one thing I want to know isnt talked about. I dont want spoilers or anything like that but I want to know if the trilogy ends or not. Just that! Is there closure to Desmond´s story or not...
I'm depressed. This game looks like a HUGE let down. WTF was that about killing bears and wolves? What is this monster hunter II? Why is every game making snow orientated environments? Ever since skyrim, borderlands 2, ACIII, and 15 other games are all snow based.
Your personal assassin crew look like coal miners, the whole native american way is so different than the philosophy of the assassins. It's just stupid. I hate the fact that they had to make the boston city FOUR TIMES bigger than it was in real life. Wth? They should of never made a colonial era, or if they did ONLY A SMALL PORTION OR DLC OF IT. Not a whole game. It looks so stupid to see an assassin running around a battle field with people in european suits lining up to shoot.
I don't know whether to cry or play Benny Hill's Yakety Yak (youtube it) and laugh at "connor" running around in an emo hoodie killing guys who belong to bioshock infinite and dishonored.
Yes, how dare they take source material and make it a little different for their game. How dare they not be historically accurate and provide a history lesson while being a VIDEO GAME at the same time. You do realize jumping into a hay bail from 10 stories up would kill you correct? Oh, but it's okay to ignore that fact. Also the "emo" hoodie you are referring to was in the original AC which by your own statement you adored. I don't get people sometimes.
have you tried programming before? it is very difficult to make snow look the way it is and actually move and act like snow so it is a great achievement for developers
" killing bears and wolves", the fans wanted something a little different since most the assassin creed games get a bit repetitive after a while so yea why not add bears and wolves lol
Frelyler I think it's stupid to FORCE a period of time that obviously CAN NOT support a true environment for a game/assassin. They could of made it a PSP title, like they did recently about the swamps in southern USA.
I'm not talking about fantasy (which this game obviously has) I'm talking about exaggerating things for no reason. ACI and II had full thriving cities that were 1000s of years old in some cases with great detail and art. Now we have flat roofs and people walking around in lame coats and a guy who sticks out like a sore BIG TOE not even a thumb. Atleast Ezio had similar apparel to the people of his time and Altair as well.
Makes no sense for a nature loving Indian to put on European clothing and run around a british style battlefield (they didn't use those tactics, atleast not until later in the war and most of the time those "stealth" tactics weren't used on the field but in the woods and unsuspecting places)
prince justin bieber 134, so the cure to "doing the same thing over and over" is "Hey! Let's grab a bear and stab it! then grab a wolf and stab it! That's the cure to repetitive gaming!" is the way to go?
It's just a skyrim rip off. I can't believe an indian is playing hop scotch in trees in a renaissance suit.
BTW frelyler the "emo" hoodie in ACI and ACII were relevant *and also many people worse the same thing in ACI other assassins remember? Same with ACII) however during the revolutionary war NOBODY looked like that. This time period is just grimey, dirty, bleh.
There's so many better choices that could of been chosen. Ancient Egypt, Japan, Babylon, are just three easy ones that had thriving cities and tons of mysterious aspects to them.
they are two different types of games so cant really compare but regardless of that you know all COD games will get 9s and above even though they don't change a damn thing
Activision heavily promotes their games through IGN so to expect them to risk future ad revenue is crazy.
Here's the thing. The safest bet in the gaming industry is Call of Duty. Simply because it sells so much it's safe to give them a 9 because no matter what you or I think. They can justify the score by saying "well millions bought it so its well deserved." They then please The Activision PR team, they get their exclusive access to future Activision titles and swag bags. A few months later the next annual cod title is confirmed and the process begins again.
CoD doesn't even get amazing reviews. I don't know why people go on about this. The previous Black Ops game scored an 8.5 from IGN. Still a great score, but it isn't the "omg CoD gets 10/10" score that everyone rants on about.
Assassins Creed is another game that gets milked on a yearly basis too.
@KingOptimus-X: And why is that? Do you really think COD needs help with sales or something? Oh, that's right..according to N4G, when they give COD high scores they're being paid off...when they give a vita game a high score they are gods.
I think call of duty will get a better score from IGN. Simply cos CoD has far too much of a hold on the gaming press. Receiving favours from publishers has always been there, if you get my meaning.
The only CoD worth 9.0 and above was the first Modern Warfare which was the last big leap for the series. Now if BO:2 can compare to previous iterations in the same way CoD4 did, then it'll be worth a high score.
Needless to say, my expectations aren't high since being letdown by every CoD title since 4. Not to say they were bad games either, just nowhere near the improvement to the series that CoD4 was.
I don't play call of duty. But people are allways bashing it. Why can't people see that millions of fans actually love the game and leave it at that. OT the only downside to the game according to the reveiwer is that it's inconsitant? Thats ok I guess.
I care. Extra content is always good. I would be very jealous if the XBOX version would have got more content. Don't care much about exclusive content like weapons or any other in game items. But missions are a different thing. It's just my opinion though. Doesn't matter if XBOX or PS3 or WiiU. I just want to play the game. The more content, the better ^^.
I'm a bit worried about the 'glitchiness' of the game as so many of the reviewers are pointing out. Not that's it not to be expected given that it's an open world title and all, just feel that the previous titles weren't overly bug-ridden. Hopefully the PC version will have less technical issues
Red Dead Redemption had glitches and yet it did not suffer much in sales and or popularity. These glitches I understand are not game breaking glitches.
I'm starting to get into the 2nd half of the game and I'm starting to get ALOT of different glitches... Crowds of people will start to disappear and pop out. Issues with clipping through objects, getting stuck in trees. There are times when in combat it won't let me draw my weapon and all I can do is block without countering. I was in a naval battle and saw one of the other ships stuck on a rock. The ship flew end over end through the air and landed pretty far away. Cosmetic glitches too: connor's hood was off in a cutscene and he was completely bald. Sometimes one of the normal footsoldiers will have the voice of one of those guys in the kilts. These aren't happening rarely, well some are, but most of these will happen several times a playthrough. The frustrating glitches will be if you're trying to complete a sidequest: you travel all the way to the marker and whatever it was that needed killing, carrying, etc isn't there and you have to leave and come back until it does. I'm a die-hard AC fan but I'm really frustrated with the lack of polish. I'll be disappointed if they don't continue to patch the game.
It's a shame that they're penalized for a slow start... All good stories start off slow and build up speed over the course of the story. If you recall, half life took a good half hour or so until it really picked up. I feel like not enough developers take the time to really build the setting before they jump into the "meat" of the story. Maybe it's just me but I kinda like the stories that start off slow. Anyone else?
When it comes to nip picking a slow start. Which is clearly how good stories start. You begin to wonder if those reviews are reviewed by people who suffer with issues like a attention deficit disorder. That requires prescribed medications.
40°
30°
60°
50°
Ad 
50°
0°
10°
20°
10°
10°
Revelations got a 8.5 also. all the other AC reviews from IGN are within a .5 or so difference
But the one thing I want to know isnt talked about. I dont want spoilers or anything like that but I want to know if the trilogy ends or not. Just that! Is there closure to Desmond´s story or not...
Your personal assassin crew look like coal miners, the whole native american way is so different than the philosophy of the assassins. It's just stupid. I hate the fact that they had to make the boston city FOUR TIMES bigger than it was in real life. Wth? They should of never made a colonial era, or if they did ONLY A SMALL PORTION OR DLC OF IT. Not a whole game. It looks so stupid to see an assassin running around a battle field with people in european suits lining up to shoot.
I don't know whether to cry or play Benny Hill's Yakety Yak (youtube it) and laugh at "connor" running around in an emo hoodie killing guys who belong to bioshock infinite and dishonored.
A person who adored the assassins Creed,
you do know is a fictional video game right
have you tried programming before?
it is very difficult to make snow look the way it is and actually move and act like snow so it is a great achievement for developers
" killing bears and wolves", the fans wanted something a little different since most the assassin creed games get a bit repetitive after a while so yea why not add bears and wolves lol
I'm not talking about fantasy (which this game obviously has) I'm talking about exaggerating things for no reason. ACI and II had full thriving cities that were 1000s of years old in some cases with great detail and art. Now we have flat roofs and people walking around in lame coats and a guy who sticks out like a sore BIG TOE not even a thumb. Atleast Ezio had similar apparel to the people of his time and Altair as well.
Makes no sense for a nature loving Indian to put on European clothing and run around a british style battlefield (they didn't use those tactics, atleast not until later in the war and most of the time those "stealth" tactics weren't used on the field but in the woods and unsuspecting places)
It's just a skyrim rip off. I can't believe an indian is playing hop scotch in trees in a renaissance suit.
BTW frelyler the "emo" hoodie in ACI and ACII were relevant *and also many people worse the same thing in ACI other assassins remember? Same with ACII) however during the revolutionary war NOBODY looked like that. This time period is just grimey, dirty, bleh.
There's so many better choices that could of been chosen. Ancient Egypt, Japan, Babylon, are just three easy ones that had thriving cities and tons of mysterious aspects to them.
I have no doubt i'll enjoy it though. At least Ubisoft has shown that they aren't afraid of trying to change things up in their flagship franchise.
Here's the thing. The safest bet in the gaming industry is Call of Duty. Simply because it sells so much it's safe to give them a 9 because no matter what you or I think. They can justify the score by saying "well millions bought it so its well deserved." They then please The Activision PR team, they get their exclusive access to future Activision titles and swag bags. A few months later the next annual cod title is confirmed and the process begins again.
Assassins Creed is another game that gets milked on a yearly basis too.
Needless to say, my expectations aren't high since being letdown by every CoD title since 4. Not to say they were bad games either, just nowhere near the improvement to the series that CoD4 was.
They really killed the series for me