Justin Belin writes, "Okay, Assassin’s Creed 3, I admit it, you did a lot of things right. However, you can still do better."
Good article and I might I also add that Assassin's Creed 4 needs a better ending too
That seems to be a theme in sequels that end with "3" these days.
You're absolutely right. I'm still trying to get over that original Mass Effect 3 ending lol
I think Ubisoft just went way to ambitious with AC3, that their ambition bit them in the ass in the end. Same problem I had with Arkham City I think what Ubi should do is focus on key elements, and really refine them. The stealth, while probably the best in the series, is not great compared to other games. By refining core mechanics, rather than going crazy adding so many things, I think AC3 would not have so many flaws technically. Also, mission structure could have been better, AC2 had great mission balance, AC3 felt really weird when it came to missions Also, I never understood this fascination with challenge and open world games. Open world games are meant and designed to let players lose and have fun, not challenge them. I feel like a badass playing AC3 and the Batman games, the GTA's and Red dead redemption as well. If I want a challenge, I would play a platformer or Dark Souls, not an open world games. I play these to have fun. Also, while I understand some people are upset with Connor as a character, I think its comendable that ubi treated the native people with that much respect. The most I've ever seen in a game before. Frankly I really liked Connor, he is no Ezio, but Ezio had the most time to grow. I hope they add story dlc to connor, rather than full games in order to flesh out his character more, and move onto a new time period with AC4 Also, Desmonds ending while disappointing is not a clusterf*** like ME3. It makes sense based on the events of previous games, rather than introdicing random new characters and elements to the story at the last second
I would like an Assassins Creed that doesn't bore me off me tits. More like AC2 would be very welcome
I just don't understand how Ubisoft undid the mechanics that worked so well in AC2. And try as they might, I don't ever thing we'll ever see a protagonist as compelling as Ezio.
Couldn't disagree more the mechanics have really never changed and Ezio was very unpopular in his frist outing. He started to grow on people in later games. There are lots of perhistoric articles about just that. There are few things i would like to see return but overall i'm preety happy with AC3.
I cant understand why they dont let you grab and beat up the npc's walkin around anymore Nothing better than grabbin a fat chick and punchin her then throwing her down the steps And please no more missions that involve throwing tea overboard
That's fatist. No point throwing her down steps, she would only bounce.
Yes, I have 75 hours into this game so far. So much Google and Youtube is needed to play it. To try and understand how to start certain tasks. Places not marked on the map. How to get around bugged out parts. So many mindless side quests. Like right now.... I've been sitting here for 2 hours trying to get the Encyclopedia of the Common Man. Down to the last one to get from the Lumber guys and they won't do it. Watch the moon come up and go down like 10 times.... who thought this would be fun?
I have one underground tunnel in NY that is glitched. Not sure how I'm going to fix that just yet. Otherwise everything else is done. A lot of side quest stuff in this game!
I did very much like the Naval game play though. The missions with the big waves was fun!
I think Ubisoft went for the Skyrim Approach. They thought let's litter the map with so much pointless stuff. The game goes out of it's way to annoy the player.
That's the issue. it just seems to big for it's own good. There are times when I felt that the game was straight up trolling me. And the glitches, my God the glitches... Perhaps if Ubisoft had scaled back it wouldn't have been such a technical mess.
With all this hunting I was having flashbacks of Red Dead Redemption, lol. The only part about animal killing that I though was a little over the top was the killing of guard dogs. I was like whoa that's not going to go over well.
That and these rage fest side games. When you have to google to death how to beat someone at some board game all to get a freakin brozen trophy. That's a little over the top!!!!
Yeah Ubisoft basically planned big and had hardly any time to realise it all. They didn't add in any Prince of Persia style levels that were in AC2, ACB and ACR! I would have gladly had those instead of the sea missions! And Connor was as bland as a vegetable. Haytham was much more of an interesting character! And the American Revolution setting kind of sucked. Boston and New York weren't fun to play around it. The frontier was definitely fun especially the tree running. I don't know why but I didn't take much issue with the ending. Maybe because I heard of a lot of people complaining before I finished so I put down my expectations. Although I thought AC3 would be the final game in the franchise. Guess not! Come at me, Juno!
I really missed those POP type levels too! The trinket missions tried to approximate them but didnt go far enough. Also, Boston and New York just didnt feel different enough from one another. That may be historically accurate but it didnt make for interesting gameplay. Maybe Connor should have headed to a european city at some point (London?) just to mix it up. On the whole, I agree with everything this article said.
Complaints big and small in no particular order: Boston and New York were sort of indistinguishable from one another and were kind of bland. Not nearly as beautiful a setting as the cities of the previous games. The ending / final act was super rushed and written pretty poorly. (From getting hit by the cannonballs onwards) It was nearly impossible to be fluidly sneaky in a lot the forts. Enemies detected you way too easily. I spent hours just exiting and re-entering forts trying to do them properly, which is sort of a good thing, but the reason I kept mucking them up felt more to do with bad game design than actual challenge. Also it seemed like the redcoats multiplied as I knocked them out, making it increasingly difficult to move anywhere in the fort without getting seen by someone. Way too many times I used the bow (which is supposed to be a "silent weapon") and I alerted everyone immediately. I sort of miss having to press X in mid jump to properly dive. That made it feel so much more vicarious. Sometimes the cut-scenes in the game felt like a cheesy period drama. Connor shouldn't stand up to use darts and the bow when he's in a stalking zone. So dumb. This game needs more non-lethal abilities. When you fight with your fists, the enemies don't die, but the game still counts it as a "kill". It doesn't make sense that Connor can effortlessly slaughter redcoats and yet have some sort of conscience about supposed "innocent people". No one really deserves to die, yet Assassin's Creed games continually paper over this moral dilemma for the sake of being action packed. I still think Connor is a really awesome character though. Well written and voiced. The tree free running was awesome, but I feel like it could use more depth. It's trees we're talking about here, not scaffolding. You shouldn't be forced to kill hostile animals, i.e. no quick time events that make you kill them. It should be the same system as it is when you fight human opponents, meaning you can run away.
When using fists the game does not count it as a kill. I full synced do not kill missions using hand to hand combat. Plus that's how you do the loot the convoy trophy.
Yeah you're right about those, but during the Charles Lee mission where you go on board the HMS Jersey, anyone you knock out with your fists is added to the tally of "kills" as part of the constraint. I think there's a few other examples.
It's funny you mention the bow; it was probably the one weapon I was looking forward to the most and yet ended up being the one I utilized the least. Meh. :/
I liked how you could shoot through one enemy and kill another with the bow ^^
yea the jersey and any missions it says regular kills read kills at attacks , for instance your minions dont count towards them, its anything you do and the jersey mission was great fun also most of that list is crap. a reboot really lets look at a recent ubi reboot and how well it went down prince of persia.... yea that one the unkillable nolan north quicktime combat nonsense.. creeds basic formula works its its own genre almost. also i dont know how many peopel actually have met native americans but the ones ive met tend to be quite dour. setting its the setting pulling it to london in the middle of a war wouldnt have worked cities of the time were low and sprawling i liked the change from the claustrophobic ones of brotherhood
games have "combat engines"?
i just don't want to see any of that micro managing nonsense (i.e. crafting, trading, deploying convoys, etc...).
1 thing we need in the next Assassins Creed, we need it not to come out. they dragged the series on for too long, it lost most of its appeal after AC:Brotherhood. AC:3 recaptured some of my interest but still no more assassins creed
Personally, I wouldn't say "don't let it come out", just don't continue with Connor. I liked the game, when ignoring the tiny side quests, and I had a small liking to Connor but not as much as other characters. But when I say let them come out with a new one, let them create a new history story line with a new protagonist in history along with a new Desmond protagonist. Since Desmond is dead, and I know Connor wasn't actually related to him, I feel it pointless to jump back to another one of Desmond's relatives. Maybe have the other 3 find a new guy, OR girl even, to take kind of the same role as Desmond, but more in he/she is the one who saves the world which after what Desmond did seems to be destroy it. It's not a perfect solution since most people want to go back to the Egyptian or Chinese eras. But that's my own personal idea.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.