Assassins Creed 3 really is terrible.

[Jiffex]

While trying to escape some guards I ran up an outhouse on to the roof of the house it belonged to. At least that's what I wanted to do, what happened was I glitched through the outhouse and couldn't get out. It was while I was running across the city to get to a mission and lost a large amount of progress.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

I couldn't get into it...I grabbed it on sale for the U and at this point, I'm still not playing as Connor. Based on what I've heard though, I'd rather continue on as...uh...Stabby McGee I think. The last AC I was really engaged with was the second and even then I was annoyed by how I was scolded for stabbing random passers-by. The first Assassin's Creed may not have had as much going on with it but at least it understood why people were buying the game; random stabbing.

 

[josemlopes]

They fucked up the free-running. That was my biggest issue with the controls.

Used to be you had walking, fast walking, running, sprinting/free-running. This made it so that whenever you choose to run when, say, chasing a target, you wouldn't involuntarily parkour onto the nearest wall or structure. But due to Ubisoft locking free-running to the right trigger, you can't move fast anymore without automatically free-running as well. I constanly lost targets because of this, since the game figured I wanted to climb a wall or a fence.

Assassin's Creed 4 has the same issue, but slightly mitigated.

Didnt really tried it yet to see if the character still climbs and shit but isnt the trigger pressure sensitive, like, if you hold it midway he doesnt go as fast?

 

[dangoball]

I've been playing it a lot recently as a second playthrough. The first time I just ran through the campaign and called it good.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "terrible" or "atrocious" game usually doesn't warrant a second playthrough. Not even being called "good" at any point. Maybe "not as good as I originally thought"? Yumeria is a really terrible anime and I would under no circumstances rewatch it from my own accord. Nothing about it was good and I finished it for two sole reasons a) I refused to believe it could be that bad and had to get better (plot twist: it didn't) b) it has only 12 episodes. If something has many flaws but is still enjoyable enough for you to come back to it and try to get as much out of it as you can, why can't we just call it "not that good" or "enjoyable but deeply flawed"?

And then people wander why 7/10 means a bad game and 6/10 is reserved for total pieces of shit when even non-numeral qualifiers have gone to the extremes of "DA BEST GARME EVAR!!!" and "WHAT A STEAMING PILE OF SHIT!!!" completely omitting the middle ground of "quite good with some serious shortcomings" and "generally a flop with some good points".

BTW: came here expecting someone to call OP out on this being and opinion. I em dissapoint

 

[Casual Shinji]

Didnt really tried it yet to see if the character still climbs and shit but isnt the trigger pressure sensitive, like, if you hold it midway he doesnt go as fast?

Might be.

It'd still be annoying to have to keep a button partially pressed when running though.

 

[Sefa Lagaaia]

I've been playing it a lot recently as a second playthrough. The first time I just ran through the campaign and called it good. This time I am trying to get as close to 100% as I can. In going so deep into it, I've come to realize it really is an atrocious game. The core gameplay mechanics are fine and fun, but everything outside of that is shit.

The first things that come to mind are the crafting and the control of horses. Both are a disgrace. The way the tree free running is set up is terrible as well and the controls are so broken it's not even funny. it should not even be an option to leap to your death after spending 15 minutes navigating a climbing puzzle to synchronize. And don't even get me started on the glitchiness.

Tell me some of your AC3 horror stories and we can all rage together at the fact this is a "completed" game that was released as beta quality.

Man, I've had that game for a few months but haven't played it yet. Have you tried Blackflag and if you have is it better than 3?

Blackflag is great, don't let 3 taint your opinion of it if you do pick it up because blackflag is pretty much a repentance for 3 and they nailed it

 

[Pockydon]

Ass Creed 3 was at the point in the series when they really needed to shake things up a little, so I think having you play as Haytham the entire game and not even involving Connor would've been a brilliant move. Only reveal that he's actually a Templar for the ending, and have the rest of the game be an undercover mission or something.

Then again, I doubt whoever wrote this piece of trash would've been able to pull that off. At all.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

I remember spending at least an hour trying to climb a tree that was also a vantage point or whatever it's called. I think I might have done it once, but somehow it didn't save. I quit the campaign halfway through due to complete and utter boredom. Why can't I just free run, climb shit, and kill people? Why do I have to fight colonial battles with horrific controls?

 

[stroopwafel]

I'm one of the 3 people who actually quite liked AC3. Now it wasn't a brilliant game by any stretch of the imagination nor even worth a second playthrough, but I definitely found it an enjoyable ride first time through. The only time I contemplated quitting was when you have to escort this dude(some historical figure but forgot his name) on a horse while evading guards. That was a truly atrocious part of the game but fortunately didn't last long. Now I won't go into Connor or the ridiculous meta-plot as both left me pretty much indifferent but the actual gameplay was quite fun and the eye for historical detail in a graphically very fine looking game mitigated most story/character issues for me. I really enjoyed just wandering around and discovering the Frontier.

For me the AC games have always been more of a visual tour through some historical setting with loose controls, clunky combat and little challenge(other than the design of the game itself). A game where you can just sit back, relax and enjoy as well as learn some historical things along the way. AC3 delivered in that regard as well as introduced naval combat which surprised me how fun and well developed it was so much so that it could even be its own game...

..which it more or less became in AC4. And while AC3 was fun AC4 is by far the superior game as it fixed nearly every issue I had with the series from the controls to the combat to the boring characters. So while I found AC3 a fun game when it was released you won't miss much if you skip on it and only play AC4.

 

[OpticalJunction]

I agree it was a let down, especially after AC2 which was seriously one of the best games I've ever played. The ship fighting scenes were unbelievably good though, too bad the rest of the game didn't follow suit.

 

[Ieyke]

AC3 isn't actually terrible. It has its problems, but it's actually a good game if taken on its own without the rest of the Assassin's Creed series to compare it to.
It's just not GREAT.

It's about a thousand times better than Assassin's Creed 1.


Best to worst:
Assassin's Creed 2
Assassin's Creed 4:Black Flag
Assassin's Creed:Brotherhood
Assassin's Creed:Revelations
Assassin's Creed 3
Assassin's Creed

 

[Someone Depressing]

I thought it could have had more of an emphasis on stealth and survival, rather than.. AC2. And 1. Just being them, except now sometimes you have your hood down, and there's some better music.

 

[Jacco]

I've been playing it a lot recently as a second playthrough. The first time I just ran through the campaign and called it good.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but "terrible" or "atrocious" game usually doesn't warrant a second playthrough. Not even being called "good" at any point. Maybe "not as good as I originally thought"? Yumeria is a really terrible anime and I would under no circumstances rewatch it from my own accord. Nothing about it was good and I finished it for two sole reasons a) I refused to believe it could be that bad and had to get better (plot twist: it didn't) b) it has only 12 episodes. If something has many flaws but is still enjoyable enough for you to come back to it and try to get as much out of it as you can, why can't we just call it "not that good" or "enjoyable but deeply flawed"?

And then people wander why 7/10 means a bad game and 6/10 is reserved for total pieces of shit when even non-numeral qualifiers have gone to the extremes of "DA BEST GARME EVAR!!!" and "WHAT A STEAMING PILE OF SHIT!!!" completely omitting the middle ground of "quite good with some serious shortcomings" and "generally a flop with some good points".

BTW: came here expecting someone to call OP out on this being and opinion. I em dissapoint

Lol Well I thought it was pretty good the first time I played it mainly because I just went through the campaign. But now that I'm 100%-ing it, I have come to the realization it is a terrible game.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

I've played all 6 main installments of the Assassin's Creed series, and AC3 is by far the worst.

Simply put, I hated all the changes they made to control and combat mechanics. The reason why the previous four installments were fun is because each preceding title built upon itself and had an overall familiar game feel.

Everything from the hit-and-miss combat and counters, insanely difficult Captains that can die easily from a Double Counter Kill, chasing the floating pieces of paper, bull crap objectives that caused you to restart an entire mission, etc. made it very difficult to enjoy the game, let alone wanting to complete 100%.

Assassin's Creed 4 employs a similar combat system and it is easier to grasp, but only because it is very similar to Assassin's Creed 3's (Gee; employing a similar combat system from a previous installment for a seamless transition to game play. How about that s***?).

 

[hazabaza1]

Hmm...
Sadly it still uses Uplay and I hear it's bollocks on the 360/PS3 but if/when I do get a PS4 I'll keep that in mind.

I have it on PS4, its a great game, I had a bug on an Assassination target that had me getting Uplay to fix it, but trust me, Uplay has some cool free stuff and they don't bother you at all.

It does on PC. I played Blood Dragon once, closed it, went back to start it and apparently I was offline for the next 36 hours despite being able to go on any other internet service so... yeah not getting it on PC.

 

[hazabaza1]

Hmm...
Sadly it still uses Uplay and I hear it's bollocks on the 360/PS3 but if/when I do get a PS4 I'll keep that in mind.

I have it on PS4, its a great game, I had a bug on an Assassination target that had me getting Uplay to fix it, but trust me, Uplay has some cool free stuff and they don't bother you at all.

It does on PC. I played Blood Dragon once, closed it, went back to start it and apparently I was offline for the next 36 hours despite being able to go on any other internet service so... yeah not getting it on PC.

From what I remember, it isn't nearly as awkward on PS4, plays well and doesn't have Uplay hounding you constantly.

Yeah I'll just wait till I get a PS4 then, should work out a lot better.

 

[Scarecrow1001]

I've been playing it a lot recently as a second playthrough. The first time I just ran through the campaign and called it good. This time I am trying to get as close to 100% as I can. In going so deep into it, I've come to realize it really is an atrocious game. The core gameplay mechanics are fine and fun, but everything outside of that is shit.

The first things that come to mind are the crafting and the control of horses. Both are a disgrace. The way the tree free running is set up is terrible as well and the controls are so broken it's not even funny. it should not even be an option to leap to your death after spending 15 minutes navigating a climbing puzzle to synchronize. And don't even get me started on the glitchiness.

Tell me some of your AC3 horror stories and we can all rage together at the fact this is a "completed" game that was released as beta quality.

The high point of the series for me was Brotherhood. After that, it just hasn't been the same. Revelations and Black Flag have flashes of brilliance. I do not speak of AC3...lest I start to sputter curses. The chase sequences got annoying, especially that last one...dear god...

It just wasn't as fun, never mind the technical glitches and intentional brokenness at points. The story was a disappointment too.

It really is a case of situation where they should have just quit while they were ahead, and moved on to another story. It isn't as if ending one arc meant saying goodbye to the universe, after all.

I agree with almost all of this, apart from one thing. Revelations was an abomination, everything it did well was done far better in previous games, and everything that was new was done terribly.
AC3 was not a good game, but thankfully AC4 was vastly improved.

 

[Soxafloppin]

It was hit and miss for me, I did a 100% playthrough shortly after it came out.

Pros
Core gameplay is pretty much intact
The Homestead...I really loved watching it go from a wasteland to a thriving town, most of the characters who joined it where fun characters if a little cliched.
I liked Achilles character, which actually made me dislike Connor due to his treatment of him now and again.
Tree running was pretty fun, but doesnt make up for the boring architecture else where.
Hunting small animals is actually quite fun, stalking them from above.

Cons
I'm in the minority that did not enjoy the Naval parts (the main reason I haven't picked up AC4)
Some 100 percent requirements where so specific, you would never do it without a guide.
Hunting Large animals...QTEs
Connor
Didnt enjoy the crafting parts. I usually just went on a Beaver cull and sold there pelt.

Overall I enjoyed just slightly less than AC2 and ACB, probably on par with ACR for me, but with a less interesting story.