PDA

View Full Version : [spoilers] Why Assassins Creed 3 is the worst of the series



gotohavasu
11-17-2012, 06:39 AM
Spoilers noted by "--------"

For a time I managed to convince myself that A3 was a "flawed, but overall great experience" as many reviewers have been saying. Upon completion of the game, I came to the conclusion that something must have gone wrong during development of this game despite it's some 4 years of development. Perhaps when development was frozen due to that lawsuit started by the doosh that made some barely similar novels featuring an animus-like machine a while ago?

-------

The story, unlike A2 and it's semi sequels, is a joke. Connor is a likeable character, as any badass is, but he has about as much depth (at least in what was actually explored) as tree bark in comparison to Ezio. A2 made us care about Ezio and his family by exploring a lot of his backstory in the beginning of the game. Part of what makes Connor's character so dull is that he will speak by yelling often, for no conceivable reason at times, and the way he speaks is often robotic and without any sense of emotion. If this was something that was done on purpose, it could have been explored to add depth to Connor. A lot less time was spent this time around trying to get us to care about Connor, his friends and his family. Whenever a particular moment came along where the game was obviously nudging at us to feel some sort of emotion or surprise, I was only surprised at how shallow it's attempts were. So much more could have been done with Haytham, and Connor's friend from his village. When Connor's mother died, I didn't care. I was still thinking about the the ridiculous invisible walls marked by "fire barriers" trying to herd me through a horribly constructed linear path to get me to this supposedly emotional development in the story. Example: Connor half lifts out of the way, half crawls underneath this log in his path when apparently he could have just crawled underneath it and saved me from a pointless button mashing sequence.
I could have forgiven the game for some of it's underwhelming plot elements if not for how irreverently, abruptly, and stupidly Desmond just dies. “Her durr uhh you haz to mak a dishizun bout da homan ras, so uh her durr ya gotta die to mak dat hapn.” “Oh hurr durr KAY HEER WE GOAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH! *dies*.” I think a proper death for Desmond would have been trying to reach some inaccessible control panel the two alien ladies didn’t want to see accessed, and such a control panel accessible through a one way trip, meaning Desmond would have to sacrifice his life. This would have been meaningful. Perhaps Desmond would have flashes of his experiences within the animus over the months as he made his final atoning sacrifice, perhaps his friends would be talking to him as he made his way over, making their last goodbyes? While the story within the animus may have been a little mediocre, it doesn't compare to how ludicrously sloppy the modern story ended. Why did Desmond die and what was his significance? No explanation. No closure. This might have been fine if there was a cliffhanger noting Desmond may have survived and yata yata. This would have excused Desmond’s obnoxiously abrupt death and the game’s lack of answers.

--------

The combat system is broken. Whether you use your fists or tomahawk or sword or whatever, the end result is the same. You can kick just as much *** using any of the mentioned methods yielding the same result. The only thing resembling a challenge in combat are only really cheap tactics that the enemy uses. Enemies have these random attributes that the game never tells you about and you have to figure out on your own. Regulars can be killed however you like, Officers and grenadiers have to be disarmed after being countered to be killed or by using the bow or gun similarly after a counter, and agiles are only different than regulars if you forget they can't be thrown or disarmed. If you try to kill these enemies in any other way, they simply ho slap you. In previous games the challenge element was in timing your counters. Combat actually used to be challenging, which warranted a reason for running away. Brotherhood introduced chain kills which made the combat flow alot better, but still the combat retained it's difficulty as the timing element was still there and the game threw more enemies at you.

Horses have a limited amount of stamina this time around, which is an annoying contradiction to the game considering Connor has no limit. You’ll spur your horse by pressing x which will make the horse gallop for a few seconds, then you’ll have to wait a few seconds to be able to do it again. Good times, good times. Oh and there’s no horse whistle, and the places horses are found are far and few between, and your horse disappears whenever you fast travel or start a mission. Have fun.

Ranged weapons are useless, because they have no range or power at all. Musketeers always outrange you, even if you try to shoot them with their own muskets. They also always, without exception, fell the horse you're riding.
Flintlocks are completely useless. In previous games it used to be in the form of the wrist pistol, which could wipe people out strong or weak but had limited ammo. Now in the form of a more realistic flintlock pistol, it takes too much time to reload for it to ever be worth reloading during a fight meaning you'll fire that 1 to 3 useless shots, which are useless because regulars are the only ones that will die within one shot from it, and then you'll reload it after the fight if you haven't already figured out that you're wasting your time by doing so.
All your little gadgets are useless because in the time it takes you to use them, you could have just as easily chain combo’d the hell out of a platoon of soldiers with your bare hands, and I do mean bare, weapon-less hands.

I mentioned that using one weapon over the other, even using your fists, always yields the same result. This means purchasing weapons for their attributes is completely pointless. This means going through the tedium that is the homestead missions is completely void of purpose. I only went through these missions because I thought I might actually unlock useful flintlock pistols, and the dual holster caught me eye in particular. The pistols are glitched so that when you first select your pistol through the menu, it will feature that selected pistol in both holsters, but after you complete or start a mission or fast travel, whatever pistol you had selected before the other will be in your secondary holster. It's maddening because it's like the devs made the decision to not allow the player to have two of the same pistol, but then there clearly was a contradicting decision made before or after that still lingers in the game code, because you can get four bars around your pistol GUI by having two double barreled pistols.

I remember that awesome first gameplay reveal. I recalled two things from it as I played the actual game: The bayonet charge and the QTA-less (quick time action sequence) fight with the wolves. Apparently wolves are impervious to arrows, or any animal that demands that you endure a QTA in order to actually kill it. And that bayonet charge? It only works if you catch an enemy off guard. It would have been nice to have a way to break through those invisible walls those guards create when they block your path during a chase. Even if it looks like you've successfully avoided getting gashed by a bayonet from one of these hos, they get you anyways.
That one bit with the wolves during the gameplay reveal stands out to me because he fought the wolves without those disrupting cutscenes, and took out at least one with a bow.

The glitches don't stop with the pistols. There are many glitches and problems you will have discovered by the end of the game. Randomly disappearing people, un-completable quests, etcetera. I never got to have more than one recruit because I never figured it out before I became so disenchanted with the game that I didn't care to, mainly because in a sector in which I completed all liberation missions I couldn't talk to the liberation contractor to proceed, so I figured I had to continue with the story to unlock it.

In the previous games you simply bought shops to unlock items corresponding to type of shop bought. This also added an amount of income to be gained every so often so in a sense you became a banker. This system became ridiculous over time as your money piled higher and higher, but it worked and it was fun. In A3 you have... convoys. You no longer buy shops to gain interest, but hunt and sell your materials to be sold to general stores. Or you can simply buy hunting materials (among other materials not worth buying to be sold for profit) to be hooked up to caravans and sold for profit. While you can increase the amount of convoys you have by 2 and increase their capacity by a bit, your income from these convoys is pretty fixed. This is actually sort of good because it makes hunting for treasure chests and other money-making activities less menial and more worth doing. This is not bad in itself though prefer the old method of the previous games, but what makes this new convoy and stockpile system suck is it's menu. Comparing the item prices when loading them onto caravans is a pain since there are so many items and the price doesn't show up until you've selected the item. Once you've deselected the item... the.menu.resets.completely. Since there are so many items, you'd better bet this is a pain. It makes the menu difficult to navigate just in general. Not such a big deal though, as the only items worth buying are Bear, Beaver, and Deer pelts, which will fill up all three of your land convoys and net you the most money. Once you figure this out you won’t have to try and compare prices, and since you heard it here you know it now. It’s still annoying for the purpose of crafting items and buying stockpile items.

The last thing I'll talk about is the map, interface, and controls. The most previous game, Revelation, introduced the ability to disable certain markers on your map. There is no such way to get rid of so much **** and litter on your map in A3. Worst of all, you have to be physically in a sector to view any of the markers on it's map other than it's fast travel locations. Looking for that last homestead mission? You'll have to endure a couple of loading screens just to check each sector's map, maybe even more if you think you missed it over all the stuff cluttering the map. The inventory menu takes about a couple seconds longer to open than it should, and there is no longer diagonal quick selection, which eliminating benefited no one as it was always optional to use, now you're just pissing off people that used it before. It’s also quite clumsy that the menu uses the left and right analog sticks, the left for weapons and the right for ranged weapons and various accessories.

After I beat the game, nothing was more insulting than being forced to watch almost a half hour of unskippable cutscenes which revealed no plot twist or any satisfying epilogue.

Stop defending this game. It is not bigger, that's not why it suffered. Previous Assassins games were just as large. This game is just a **** that Ubi shat out like many of it's games. The Assassins Creed series was different than the others for a time, but it's dead to me now, and dead to anyone else with sense. Even if the next game is an improvement the story is dead, and Assassins Creed has only ever been as addicting for the amount of time it's story has managed to captivate us for.
Sequels are supposed to take things from their predecessors and improve upon them, not **** on them.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 07:03 AM
Stop defending this game. It is not bigger, that's not why it suffered. Previous Assassins games were just as large. This game is just a **** that Ubi shat out like many of it's games. The Assassins Creed series was different than the others for a time, but it's dead to me now, and dead to anyone else with sense. Even if the next game is an improvement the story is dead, and Assassins Creed has only ever been as addicting for the amount of time it's story has managed to captivate us for.
Sequels are supposed to take things from their predecessors and improve upon them, not **** on them.
Your Post is terrible and this thread is terrible. full of childish attacks instead of constructive criticism, and not to mention false claims as well..

1- No one is defending this game. No one forced anyone to love this game. Many people loved it, a small minority here did not (FACT)
2-Do not claim anyone hating has more sense. You become an Idiot for saying that and lose ALL credibility for presenting your Opinion as fact and superior to any other..
3-I wanted to say welcome, but with that last Paragraph, I hope you never post here again..

Anyone calling me fan boy for this is an Idiot who does not know how to read

TwoDents
11-17-2012, 07:08 AM
http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhrw2ctYDo1qajffpo1_500.gif

And M, you stole the keys right out of my keyboard.

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 07:21 AM
lulz at this thread.

gotohavasu
11-17-2012, 07:33 AM
Your Post is terrible and this thread is terrible. full of childish attacks instead of constructive criticism, and not to mention false claims as well..

1- No one is defending this game. No one forced anyone to love this game. Many people loved it, a small minority here did not (FACT)
2-Do not claim anyone hating has more sense. You become an Idiot for saying that and lose ALL credibility for presenting your Opinion as fact and superior to any other..
3-I wanted to say welcome, but with that last Paragraph, I hope you never post here again..

Anyone calling me fan boy for this is an Idiot who does not know how to read

My thread is well constructed, if nothing else it's a lot more thought out than your little thing. No childish attacks actually. Also no false claims. Let's take a look at your masterpiece.

1- You are defending this game, and others below are. The fact that no one is forcing anybody to love or hate this game is irrelevant. MANY people do not browse on forums, and only a small minority of forum goers actually bother consistently wasting their time on forums. Every forum I visit it's the same small minority such as yourselves acting as some sort of higher power, claiming to be "the community" or in some way speaking for it. There will be about a couple dozen more people to visit my thread, the other dozen thousand subscribers only wanted to ask one question or other. Much of the community won't lay eyes on this thread. Every once in a while you get some sane person like me, who visits a forum not to waste time butt kissing other's threads or revealing things about my life nobody cares about, but somebody who wants to make an impression on developers publishers. I would say many people bought A3 in anticipation and upon completion agree it was a less than game of the year material at least.

2- I will make whatever claims I wish. I'm not an idiot for making claims you disagree with, and you are the one implying my opinion is inferior which is ironic.

Fanboy.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 07:42 AM
My thread is well constructed, if nothing else it's a lot more thought out than your little thing. No childish attacks actually. Also no false claims. Let's take a look at your masterpiece.

1- You are defending this game, and others below are. The fact that no one is forcing anybody to love or hate this game is irrelevant. MANY people do not browse on forums, and only a small minority of forum goers actually bother consistently wasting their time on forums. Every forum I visit it's the same small minority such as yourselves acting as some sort of higher power, claiming to be "the community" or in some way speaking for it. There will be about a couple dozen more people to visit my thread, the other dozen thousand subscribers only wanted to ask one question or other. Much of the community won't lay eyes on this thread. Every once in a while you get some sane person like me, who visits a forum not to waste time butt kissing other's threads or revealing things about my life nobody cares about, but somebody who wants to make an impression on developers publishers. I would say many people bought A3 and upon completion agree it was a less than game of the year material at least.

2- I will make whatever claims I wish. I'm not an idiot for making claims you disagree with, and you are the one implying my opinion is inferior which is ironic.

Fanboy.
Continue to make a fool of yourself..I never said your opinion was Inferior..I simply thought you were an Idiot who thinks he`s the most Intelligent person on this forum..

Please, I`m entertained..

You`re an Idiot who cannot read...Most people liked the game.. Get Mad.

You come here thinking your King, claiming ANYONE who enjoyed the game is Insane while you`re a Very smart person who knows better.. Guess what ? No one is You...Not even other people who hated the game have that Attitude...They`re respectful and constructive..

You ? You`re a just a little brat who thinks he`s the Child every mother wants. Your post is full of cuss, disrespectful and has points that are WRONG...not Opinion.. JUST WRONG.. False..You obviously have not played the game enough, because you have got some working to do on your facts..

I`m a Fan-boy...at least i`m not you

zhengyingli
11-17-2012, 07:47 AM
Less than game of the year material doesn't mean it's horrible. There are a bunch of what I judge to be great games that are not even close to GOTY material. We defend the gamei, but most of us actually don't defend some of the faults you've raised, yet we love the game. Why? Most of the issues raised here besides glitches are only based on preference.

So what if the end results of different weapons are the same? I fist fight all the time now because I think it's cool, not because it's better. I've also used guns for double kills or shot someone I don't bother to wait to get close. Slow reloads prevent me from cheesing my way through.

FACT: ACIII is the biggest game by far when compared to the rest of the series.
OPINION: Best/worse, take your pick.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 07:49 AM
OPINION: Best/worse, take your pick.
He already did, which I respect.

But then he made that ridiculous paragraph that says that any "sane" person would think its the worst...Choose an Opinion, buddy...Do not enforce It..

So much Idiots joining the forums.. it`s getting utterly disgusting..I`m glad I only meet these type people on the Internet..

Farlander1991
11-17-2012, 08:08 AM
Since I haven't played the game yet, I can't exactly say anything about AC3, so... I'm not defending it. I don't have an opinion on it yet. But, with that said...


Combat actually used to be challenging

This I disagree with. Combat used to be challenging only in Assassin's Creed 1, and that is before you get the counter-attack (after which combat became challenging only with the Templars). AC2 combat is completely broken because counters became a one hit kill (while in AC they weren't always one hit kill, depended on the weapon you have and enemy you fight) and you can literally counter everybody with the hidden blade (and it's not exactly challenging either, the hidden blade counter window in AC2 is MUCH MUCH wider than AC1 hidden blade counter window). ACB kill streak feature has broken everything even more, as it was enough to counter only once, and then you're in kill mode. Timing in kill streak isn't important at all, because to continue it if the enemy's attack it's enough to, well, counter attack him again with the hidden blade (at the least seekers became immune to hidden blade counters in ACB, but there wasn't enough of them for that to make a difference really). The combat system in Ezio's trilogy is unchallenging and utterly broken (unless you restrict yourself from doing certain things, which... if you have to restrict yourself on purpose from doing something to make the system more challenging, then it's a broken system).

In fact, what you say about AC3 system makes it feel BETTER than the previous games. Heck, this:

Enemies have these random attributes that the game never tells you about and you have to figure out on your own.
is written as a complaint, but I can't see how that's a bad thing. Enemies require different strategies and you have to learn with experience how to defeat them instead of everything being handed on a silver platter has now became bad?


This system became ridiculous over time as your money piled higher and higher, but it worked and it was fun.

I'm curious, how the economic system in AC2-ACR is fun exactly? I just want to hear your opinion on that. To me, economic system in ACB and ACR was just a chore, I had ****tons of money and I would just buy everything I saw on my way, I didn't even care what I was buying. AC2 at least had the aesthetic pleasure of Monteriggioni visibly changing A LOT, so even though economic system in AC2 had 0 depth, it still felt rewarding in a way.


This means purchasing weapons for their attributes is completely pointless.

This is the same case with AC2-ACR. Because the dominant strategy in the games is to counter, which is always one hit kill, and in ACB and ACR to use kill streak after that, which are always one hit kill too, the only reason to change a weapon in AC2-ACR trilogy is for aesthetic pleasure, as it literally doesn't add any depth to the combat system, due to it being, well, broken.

Overall, I think you've got a nice review there, even though I personally think that most of your arguments against AC3 are existing problems in previous AC games, only for some reason you put those problems in a positive light. Which I do not agree with. But, hey, isn't that what Assassin's Creed is all about, nothing is true, everything is permitted, and everybody should follow their own way and opinions? :)

jcbigjohn8
11-17-2012, 08:17 AM
There is a horse whistle and there is a way to "filter" stuff on and off on your map.

Aphex_Tim
11-17-2012, 08:18 AM
So much Idiots joining the forums.. it`s getting utterly disgusting..I`m glad I only meet these type people on the Internet..

This will continue for a couple of weeks, perhaps months; Then it's back to the good old days. ^^

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 08:21 AM
This will continue for a couple of weeks, perhaps months; Then it's back to the good old days. ^^
Months ? i`m Glad I have AC III and exams in the coming weeks..

I wish you those who are remaining luck with this..

Lexax123
11-17-2012, 08:22 AM
My thread is well constructed, if nothing else it's a lot more thought out than your little thing. No childish attacks actually. Also no false claims. Let's take a look at your masterpiece.

1- You are defending this game, and others below are. The fact that no one is forcing anybody to love or hate this game is irrelevant. MANY people do not browse on forums, and only a small minority of forum goers actually bother consistently wasting their time on forums. Every forum I visit it's the same small minority such as yourselves acting as some sort of higher power, claiming to be "the community" or in some way speaking for it. There will be about a couple dozen more people to visit my thread, the other dozen thousand subscribers only wanted to ask one question or other. Much of the community won't lay eyes on this thread. Every once in a while you get some sane person like me, who visits a forum not to waste time butt kissing other's threads or revealing things about my life nobody cares about, but somebody who wants to make an impression on developers publishers. I would say many people bought A3 and upon completion agree it was a less than game of the year material at least.

2- I will make whatever claims I wish. I'm not an idiot for making claims you disagree with, and you are the one implying my opinion is inferior which is ironic.

Fanboy.


Oh look, another genius who thinks their opinion = fact / general consensus, and that anyone else who thinks this game isn't a steaming pile of crap has 'no sense' (your words). What is ironic is that you can't even comprehend your own post and others' posts. He doesn't claim your 'opinion' is inferior, simply that your claims that your opinions are factual, are idiotic.

It's true, the majority of the community is not on the forums. Again, what is ironic is that you claim that the people who like the game think they represent the community as a whole, and then you come and say that the majority of the community has to agree with your opinion. Truth is, it's always the haters that claim that there opinion represents the majority, and that they are oh-so smarter and 'sane' because they can 'criticize' a game. Most of you post would not help the developers at all, since most of your complaints about the game, where already present or worse in the previous games.

Your post is filled with some things that are simply factually wrong, not because I disagree, but because they are simply not true.


I remember that awesome first gameplay reveal. I recalled two things from it as I played the actual game: The bayonet charge and the QTA-less (quick time action sequence) fight with the wolves. Apparently wolves are impervious to arrows, or any animal that demands that you endure a QTA in order to actually kill it. And that bayonet charge? It only works if you catch an enemy off guard. It would have been nice to have a way to break through those invisible walls those guards create when they block your path during a chase. Even if it looks like you've successfully avoided getting gashed by a bayonet from one of these hos, they get you anyways.


The first gameplay we saw (I assume your talking about the e3 demo) did have QTE's for the wolves, maybe you should watch it again. I can do musket charges when the guard is aware, just out of open conflict. As for the invisible walls, excluding ACR, were always there in other games.


Horses have a limited amount of stamina this time around, which is an annoying contradiction to the game considering Connor has no limit. You’ll spur your horse by pressing x which will make the horse gallop for a few seconds, then you’ll have to wait a few seconds to be able to do it again. Good times, good times. Oh and there’s no horse whistle, and the places horses are found are far and few between, and your horse disappears whenever you fast travel or start a mission. Have fun.

ACB didn't even allow you to gallop, ACR simply didn't have horses. And their is a horse whistle.

The rest of this, I simply disagree with...


The combat system is broken. Whether you use your fists or tomahawk or sword or whatever, the end result is the same. You can kick just as much *** using any of the mentioned methods yielding the same result. The only thing resembling a challenge in combat are only really cheap tactics that the enemy uses. Enemies have these random attributes that the game never tells you about and you have to figure out on your own. Regulars can be killed however you like, Officers and grenadiers have to be disarmed after being countered to be killed or by using the bow or gun similarly after a counter, and agiles are only different than regulars if you forget they can't be thrown or disarmed. If you try to kill these enemies in any other way, they simply ho slap you. In previous games the challenge element was in timing your counters. Combat actually used to be challenging, which warranted a reason for running away. Brotherhood introduced chain kills which made the combat flow alot better, but still the combat retained it's difficulty as the timing element was still there and the game threw more enemies at you.

Are you serious? Timing? What timing, the counter windows were just as long, brotherhood threw way less enemies then AC3, 1 every 2 or 3 kills tops. AC3 throws one every 1-2 kills, and sometimes throw 2 at once. Not to mention firing lines, the more prevalent use of fire-arms, grenades and no medicine. Brotherhood was literally the easiest in the series, the combat was a joke. Weapon usage is no different from the ezio trilogy what so ever, you can destroy any enemy with any weapon. Oh, except the enemies where even cheaper, you just have to counter them more (Jannisaries)


Worst of all, you have to be physically in a sector to view any of the markers on it's map other than it's fast travel locations.
Interface I agree with, except the above, previous games you couldn't even zoom into a zone you weren't in

Glitches are undeniable, (though not as bad as some people say) and story is completely subjective, I thought it was the best after AC2.

The reason I compared so much with previous games, is because you said it was the worst in the series, I'm not saying it's the best game ever, or event that it's the best in the series, oh but I'm just a stoopid fanboy so my opinion must be factually wrong.

cap10a
11-17-2012, 08:28 AM
There is a horse whistle and there is a way to "filter" stuff on and off on your map.

this is exactly what i was just about to say lol.

OP is just one hater out of the minority. personally AC3 is my favourite game of the series, if not of all time.
1. combat feels AWESOME, especially with tomahawk
2. love the bow and arrow
3. love the naval missions
4. enjoyed homestead better than monterigionni etc in other games

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 08:32 AM
Some valid points in there....Genuine issues. I agree with the game having a weak narrative and the absolute nonsensical amount of non-AC ******** this game is filled with. "Crafting Tables"? ****ing No thank you....where the sandbox at?

It's the biggest AC game but far from being the best because of some really regressive steps.

I really wish AC4 is a hybrid between ACR+AC3 with a humongous dose of AC1 chucked in when it comes to 'Assassination missions'

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 08:32 AM
In the end "Why Assassins Creed 3 is the worst of the series" because that`s your Oh So respected, Oh so Freely chosen Opinion That you`re NOT supposed to belittle others who do not share it..

/Thread

ZephyrStrife
11-17-2012, 08:38 AM
Hmmm. A lot of nitpicking...and whining...and a whole lot of complaints that make me wonder if you were even remotely trying to figure out the altered mechanics of gameplay. A few things to point out:

1) Yes, there is a horse whistle feature...pay attention.

2) Flintlock pistols work like that. Why should Connor have a magical gun that reloads faster than the enemies? You complain about gameplay being too easy, but then you're whining about the fact that you're gun takes too long to reload, which inevitably would make the the gameplay even easier. Make up your mind.

3) The horses have always been slow since their re-introduction in AC:B. Most players would rather free-run anyways. Its intentional, by the look of it, as the player is always able to run faster than the horses. If the horses were quick I'm sure people would complain "...whats the point in free running if travelling by horse is faster wah wah wah...."

4) Combat has never been challenging in AC. Its countering. I could do it with my eyes closed. -__-

5) Many of you're complaints about the gameplay flaws are odd. It doesn't seem like you know what you're doing. The weapons differ by speed, combo output, rate of fire (gun), and power (sword). The other gear such as Connor's rope dart can be used to strangle, pull an enemy at a distance away from you closer, or drag them down to the ground. Some higher ranked enemies are actually easier to take out using the rope dart. You're probably just hacking and slashing and not trying to be innovative at all.

6) They are aware of the glitches and they're fixing them. And they aren't game-breaking glitches, so stop making them sound worse then they actually are. The altered pistols is a glitch. The royal pistols provides you with four shots....which you get through homestead missions.

7) The map has a "show certain icons feature" via sorting by missions, collectibles, etc. And as for "suffering through a couple of loading screens to see icons"...you do realize you can zoom in and out of the map to go to specific areas on the selected region (zoom in on the Frontier symbol and there will be a fast travel to the homestead) and fast travel to that specific location?

8) Why would their be an epilogue? What makes you think this series is done? The ending itself is a plot twist (Juno's true intentions, Connor gets the short end of the stick, etc). Hi, this is AC...shocking, abrupt, and confusing endings are what they have always done. Again, why are you surprised?

But hey, if you want to drop the series like a bad habit, you go right ahead.

rego00123
11-17-2012, 08:50 AM
i do not think this is "the worst" i think refining the combat and control to being a little more user friendly has just made the worst aspects of the series standout more.

also, why do people want horses to be atv's?!? they are not go anywhere do anything machines, they have very definite limitations in real life.

gotohavasu
11-17-2012, 08:55 AM
@Farlander

The problem I have with the random attributes is that they seem inconsistent and irrational, particularly because Connor is so badass and they're obviously going for making the player feel empowered, why try to put a pathetic pebble in the way of the player? Why would a captain or grenadier only be able to be defeated by being disarmed but not by parrying them and then flanking for a critical stab? Why would an agile not be able to be disarmed but then easily parried flanked and stabbed? Agiles are also something I've hated ever since they were introduced. I'd rather they just make enemies harder to kill in other ways. If you successfully time a counter attack, then that should be the end of it. If the enemy is going to counter your counter, then you should also be able to counter that. If they want to make it harder to counter them or make them take more time to break their guard that's fine, but any other attribute that acts like some absolute is cheap and stupid. It's not even particularly challenging actually, it's more just annoying.
Also, an enemy that you can only kill by countering? That's also stupid. When a game says you can't do such and such period that's wrong.
Take the templars in AC1 for example. You can try kill them however you like, they're just more resistant to your attacks and you have to try harder. I like that kind of challenge, not some fake one.

I liked how the game worked before chain killing was introduced. Here consumable items had much more impact. In future games chain killing should exist, but in another form to make consumables more relevant and to make the game more challenging.

And pre-Brotherhood weapon attributes do have a purpose if you try to attack while waiting to be attacked to execute a counter. Also, pre-Brotherhood always had plenty of enemies that would resist countering.

gotohavasu
11-17-2012, 08:57 AM
i do not think this is "the worst" i think refining the combat and control to being a little more user friendly has just made the worst aspects of the series standout more.

also, why do people want horses to be atv's?!? they are not go anywhere do anything machines, they have very definite limitations in real life.

Lol, so do human beings. I'm only asking for consistency. If the game were going for realism I'd ask that they make horses more realistic. Either way, I think horses in real life can sprint far longer than one in AC3.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 09:00 AM
The problem I have with the random attributes is that they seem inconsistent and irrational, particularly because Connor is so badass and they're obviously going for making the player feel empowered, why try to put a pathetic pebble in the way of the player? Why would a captain or grenadier only be able to be defeated by being disarmed but not by parrying them and then flanking for a critical stab? Why would an agile not be able to be disarmed but then easily parried flanked and stabbed? Agiles are also something I've hated ever since they were introduced. I'd rather they just make enemies harder to kill in other ways. If you successfully time a counter attack, then that should be the end of it. If the enemy is going to counter your counter, then you should also be able to counter that. If they want to make it harder to counter them or make them take more time to break their guard that's fine, but any other attribute that acts like some absolute is cheap and stupid. It's not even particularly challenging actually, it's more just annoying.
Also, an enemy that you can only kill by countering? That's also stupid. When a game says you can't do such and such period that's wrong.
Take the templars in AC1 for example. You can try kill them however you like, they're just more resistant to your attacks and you have to try harder. I like that kind of challenge, not some fake one.

I liked how the game worked before chain killing was introduced. Here consumable items had much more impact. In future games chain killing should exist, but in another form to make consumables more relevant and to make the game more challenging.

And pre-Brotherhood weapon attributes do have a purpose if you try to attack while waiting to be attacked to execute a counter. Also, pre-Brotherhood always had plenty of enemies that would resist countering.
1- You`re not the one that decides what`s a cheap challenge and what`s not. We call that Opinion here..
2-No, the Tempars in AC I simply had to be mashed and that`s it. Nothing of "Kill them how ever you liked" there..That`s not real challenge. They`re just Jannesaries..
3-Attributes never had an Impact on any weapon. What you`re saying is factually false.
4-Again, No..The People resistant to countering just had to be countered more and more...Prompting more stagnant battles
5-If every Enemy had the same strategy to be beaten then the game would be easier than it already is. The enemy archetypes make you think more at how to approach them

DonzTM
11-17-2012, 09:08 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Rc8k_D3yYoE/Tw4IyOKMysI/AAAAAAAAAls/awgasVzJMfA/s320/Stephen-Colbert-Popcorn.gif

Farlander1991
11-17-2012, 09:10 AM
And pre-Brotherhood weapon attributes do have a purpose if you try to attack while waiting to be attacked to execute a counter.

See, 'IF you try to attack', however, there is NO incentive to attack. Just to counter because that's the dominant strategy in the game. Because the system is broken.


Also, pre-Brotherhood always had plenty of enemies that would resist countering.

Pre-Brotherhood Hidden Blade was always a one hit counter and there was no enemy immune to it, even the spear-wielding seekers. Really you could beat the whole game easily with a hidden blade.

projectpat06
11-17-2012, 09:25 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Rc8k_D3yYoE/Tw4IyOKMysI/AAAAAAAAAls/awgasVzJMfA/s320/Stephen-Colbert-Popcorn.gif

hahah epic.


This whole thread is dumb btw. We all know the game was a let down in some aspects (and that's really only certain people's opinions) but we also know that the game is still incredible in other aspects. It's a gorgeous and thrilling Assassin's Creed Game. I think too many people are wanting it to be another Red Dead or some RPG when really I compare it more to Arkham City with just more things to collect and much more side content that's there for fun. Whether the game is good or not is only relevant to the individual gamer. Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 09:31 AM
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder

And yet OP starts off an absolute statement in his OP, as it that is a foregone conclusion. Not just that, he has the audacity to claim whoever disagrees with him is insane. Brilliant.. just brilliant.

projectpat06
11-17-2012, 09:36 AM
And yet OP starts off an absolute statement in his OP, as it that is a foregone conclusion. Not just that, he has the audacity to claim whoever disagrees with him is insane. Brilliant.. just brilliant.

I'll take the claim of being insane. why not?

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:16 AM
Why are people hating on the OP? Most of what was said true, its not "opinion" Assassin's creed 3 is majorly flawed, things were promised that were not delivered, questions were left unanswered and it is severely under polished not to talk about the pathetic and pointless plot element "find the key" to use the animus again. AC3 was clearly not what it should have been, anyone who can't see that has not been playing the same game i have. It is clearly unfinished despite nearly 4 years of development i want to know why. This game held so much promise and has had several years building up to it to fall short on so many levels

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:17 AM
Why are people hating on the OP? Most of what was said true, its not "opinion" Assassin's creed 3 is majorly flawed, things were promised that were not delivered, questions were left unanswered and it is severely under polished not to talk about the pathetic and pointless plot element "find the key" to use the animus again. AC3 was clearly not what it should have been, anyone who can't see that has not been playing the same game i have. It is clearly unfinished despite nearly 4 years of development i want to know why. This game held so much promise and has had several years building up to it to fall short on so many levels
Again with the labeling of anyone who does not agree with you.. WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE ?????

We do not "hate" on him, for his Opinion (Yes, game being flawed is an Opinion and differs from person to person..I guess I just taught you something new today) We hate on him for the same reason I may call you an Idiot right now.. This "Anyone who does not agree with me is Insane/mad/played a different game"

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:19 AM
Again with the labeling people who do not agree with you.. WHAT THE **** IS WRONG WITH YOU ?????
I don't understand how you cant see that this game is flawed.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:21 AM
I don't understand how you cant see that this game is flawed.
It`s my ****ing OPINION GOD DAMM IT !!!

TwoDents
11-17-2012, 10:22 AM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Rc8k_D3yYoE/Tw4IyOKMysI/AAAAAAAAAls/awgasVzJMfA/s320/Stephen-Colbert-Popcorn.gif

https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/wsg/image/1342/88/1342882777399.gif

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 10:24 AM
Lol. God forbid anyone holds a different opinion than mine! WTH is wrong with you people! You are clearly insane! You clearly didn't play the same game! Yada yada yada

Its funny the haters accuse others of fanboyism while they themselves are the ones incapable of respecting other's opinions.

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 10:24 AM
I don't understand how you cant see that this game is flawed.

I don't understand how you can't see the game is perfect!

See? It works both ways.

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:28 AM
It`s my ****ing OPINION GOD DAMM IT !!!
NO it not! If a house came down because it was built incorrectly and i said to you " it was a faulty house" you cant go and say " no it wasn't its perfect". the game has flaws and thats what brought it down. you cant say it didn't have flaws because they are clearly there. i can even quote you from other threads talking about them. So stop say its "Opinion" it isn't.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:32 AM
NO it not! If a house came down because it was built incorrectly and i said to you " it was a faulty house" you cant go and say " no it wasn't its perfect". the game has flaws and thats what brought it down. you cant say it didn't have flaws because they are clearly there. i can even quote you from other threads talking about them. So stop say its "Opinion" it isn't.
Then why are we having this conversation if you can quote me ? Do you think I suffer from several Personalities Disorder ?

And Your Comparison is Horrible. Games are not Houses. games are Subjective. Houses aren't.. What you view as a flaw in game, can be perceived as great by others..

Houses are not like that..A House has a Generally agreed upon Status to be called "a house" a living space, a Shelter. Features In Video games Are SUBJECTIVE..

Hopefully that gets through your dense brain, and everyone like yourself, that not everyone shares your goddamm views. Also, the game was not "Brought down" It was a success Financially and Critically and has been greatly received by the forum Community FACT

zhengyingli
11-17-2012, 10:34 AM
Then why are we having this conversation if you can quote me ? Do you think I suffer from several Personalities Disorder ?

And Your Comparison is Horrible. Games are not Houses. games are Subjective. Houses aren't.. What you view as a flaw in game, can be perceived as great by others..

Houses are not like that..A House has a Generally agreed upon Status to be called "a house" a living space, a Shelter. Features In Video games Are SUBJECTIVE..

Hopefully that gets through your dense brain that not everyone shares your goddamm views
Actually, if I design a house to fall in order to scam someone, that house, in my opinion, is ****ing perfect.

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:39 AM
Then why are we having this conversation if you can quote me ? Do you think I suffer from several Personalities Disorder ?

And Your Comparison is Horrible. Games are not Houses. games are Subjective. Houses aren't.. What you view as a flaw in game, can be perceived as great by others..Houses are not like that..
What! hahaha you think that houses are not subjective? People can have opinions on houses just as they can games. A game just like a house can have flaws that are not subjective. you think that a graphical glitch that makes part of the game inaccessible is perfect in the eyes of another? Or are you so blinded by how great the other assassin's creed games were that you cant see this one fall short?

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 10:41 AM
Whoa. Some people really have a tough time understanding what opinions and subjectivity are..

*Faith in humanity lost*

TheHumanTowel
11-17-2012, 10:44 AM
NO it not! If a house came down because it was built incorrectly and i said to you " it was a faulty house" you cant go and say " no it wasn't its perfect". the game has flaws and thats what brought it down. you cant say it didn't have flaws because they are clearly there. i can even quote you from other threads talking about them. So stop say its "Opinion" it isn't.
Good lord that's an awful metaphor.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:44 AM
What! hahaha you think that houses are not subjective? People can have opinions on houses just as they can games. A game just like a house can have flaws that are not subjective. you think that a graphical glitch that makes part of the game inaccessible is perfect in the eyes of another? Or are you so blinded by how great the other assassin's creed games were that you cant see this one fall short?
You are starting to get on my nerves with constant stupidity.. So for the sake and respect of everyone..I`ll just drop it

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:45 AM
Good lord that's an awful metaphor.
Well i didn't put much thought into it.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:46 AM
well i didn't put much thought into it.
a-****ing-pparently

http://edwardcheever.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/facedesk.jpg

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:47 AM
You are starting to get on my nerves with constant stupidity.. So for the sake and respect of everyone..I`ll just drop it
funny how i see you in the same way. guess that's opinion..

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:48 AM
funny how i see you in the same way. guess that's opinion..
Congratulations... That`s Opinion..Now apply it to everything else

Here`s Your damm Diploma

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 10:50 AM
What! hahaha you think that houses are not subjective? People can have opinions on houses just as they can games. A game just like a house can have flaws that are not subjective. you think that a graphical glitch that makes part of the game inaccessible is perfect in the eyes of another? Or are you so blinded by how great the other assassin's creed games were that you cant see this one fall short?

You can be subjective regarding the aesthetics and the architecture....if you're being subjective about the foundation, the thickness of the walls and the HVAC systems....well you need to up your vitamin intake....

xsatanicjokerx
11-17-2012, 10:52 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkTb9GP9lVI

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 10:53 AM
a-****ing-pparently

http://edwardcheever.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/facedesk.jpg

I thought a nuclear facepalm would be more appropriate..

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 10:55 AM
I thought a nuclear facepalm would be more appropriate..
I literally Face desked...So THAT was probably more appropriate x|

Since when are Opinions argued on ?? And since when is forming Opinions not Subjective ?? Good Heavens this is outrageous

Staple-Tape
11-17-2012, 11:01 AM
What gets me about posts like these is why take the time to write a long review and rant about a game you don't like? Rather then spend hours looking for every minor flaw in the game just so you can write an essay about, why not stop playing? It's simply really. Return the game and stop complaining. I take it you are one of those people that only look at the bad things.

I had a friend like you once. Every time he watched a movie, he would look for all the small things that he could point out that made the movie somehow inaccurate or flawed. You could tell he really enjoyed it because he would always get this smile on his face and he would sound excited every time he was talking to people about all these little mistakes. He would get some sort of pleasure out of criticizing other people's work in a negative manor. I'm certain it was more of an attention thing. As in he wanted more attention and he thought the best way to get it was by tearing apart something someone worked hard on. Now stop trying to get attention by ranting.

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 11:05 AM
Also, everybody...and I mean EVERYBODY needs to calm the **** down.

Assassin_M:
While OP was wrong in labeling people who loved AC3 insane, you didn't have to jump on him and become belligerent....ignore such comments and it'll only lead to better discussions. Also don't overstate the "Opinion=/=Fact" argument every and anytime....it is obvious that in a forum everything is a personal opinion unless stated otherwise. Case of the straw man never leads to anything productive.

Aphex_Tim:
Yes because a healthy forum is one without dissent..or arguments...just group hugs and back-patting.
I don't know if you can see the writing on the wall but it is slowly dawning on people and professional reviewers that AC is showing its age and that there were several flaws that will only be magnified in following games. AC has obtained a COD like rep and is slowly losing its identity. If you want a criticism free environment, you'll have to deal with a mediocre game....if not now then maybe 3 or 4 years down the line

Lexax:
OP never claims his opinions as being facts...hence rendering all "Opinion=/=Facts" moot. So no more need for snarky comments

Gotahavsu:
While I agree with some of the issues, as others have pointed out some of your criticisms are factually incorrect. Also, please try and refrain from going into "Preach" mode and labelling people who disagree with you...thats counterproductive to your initial goals...and A-holish.


Well...that said

I wish you guys can discuss the faults without splitting into AC3 lovers/AC3 haters :nonchalance:

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 11:11 AM
What gets me about posts like these is why take the time to write a long review and rant about a game you don't like? Rather then spend hours looking for every minor flaw in the game just so you can write an essay about, why not stop playing? It's simply really. Return the game and stop complaining. I take it you are one of those people that only look at the bad things.

I had a friend like you once. Every time he watched a movie, he would look for all the small things that he could point out that made the movie somehow inaccurate or flawed. You could tell he really enjoyed it because he would always get this smile on his face and he would sound excited every time he was talking to people about all these little mistakes. He would get some sort of pleasure out of criticizing other people's work in a negative manor. I'm certain it was more of an attention thing. As in he wanted more attention and he thought the best way to get it was by tearing apart something someone worked hard on. Now stop trying to get attention by ranting.


This attitude of indifference towards flaws is even worse than the attitude you describe.

He wrote an essay because he is a fan
He wrote an essay because he would like to see things rectified
He wrote an essay because he wanted to be detailed in his post and cared
He wrote an essay because he spent money on a product without prior trial and the product failed to meet expectations
He wrote an essay because he has every mother****ing right to do so

I hope to go you realize how this attitude indifference towards the quality of games is detrimental to a healthy development of the franchise.

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 11:11 AM
Assassin_M:
While OP was wrong in labeling people who loved AC3 insane, you didn't have to jump on him and become belligerent....ignore such comments and it'll only lead to better discussions. Also don't overstate the "Opinion=/=Fact" argument every and anytime....it is obvious that in a forum everything is a personal opinion unless stated otherwise. Case of the straw man never leads to anything productive.

Sorry, man...You are one of the few Criticizers I respect...I`m taking your Advice.. Sorry, Everyone

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 11:13 AM
...and then we hugged and kissed!

Assassin_M
11-17-2012, 11:14 AM
...and then we hugged and kissed!
Oh No... I`m not doing that..

I`m apologizing to someone I respect.. OP has no respect from me, BUT for his Opinion... Nothing else

WiriestScroll3
11-17-2012, 11:27 AM
I quess this game would be great if they add missing parts in it :-) But we know such thing never happen, that is eight wonder of the world if they add something new in this game.

playassassins1
11-17-2012, 11:53 AM
*sigh*

True_Assassin92
11-17-2012, 12:11 PM
Let's say ubisoft did not deliver what was promised. :)

Legendz54
11-17-2012, 12:35 PM
Sigh... I really think we should start ignoring threads like this.. They are irritating and just make members argue... Overall it just ruins the vibe of what this forum used to be... There are so many people out there that are just itching to give this game a bad reputation.

ProdiGurl
11-17-2012, 12:42 PM
My thread is well constructed, if nothing else it's a lot more thought out than your little thing. No childish attacks actually. Also no false claims. Let's take a look at your masterpiece.
Well constructed doesn't necessarily equal good or accurate content however.



1- You are defending this game, and others below are. The fact that no one is forcing anybody to love or hate this game is irrelevant. MANY people do not browse on forums, and only a small minority of forum goers actually bother consistently wasting their time on forums. Every forum I visit it's the same small minority such as yourselves acting as some sort of higher power, claiming to be "the community" or in some way speaking for it. There will be about a couple dozen more people to visit my thread, the other dozen thousand subscribers only wanted to ask one question or other. Much of the community won't lay eyes on this thread. Every once in a while you get some sane person like me, who visits a forum not to waste time butt kissing other's threads or revealing things about my life nobody cares about, but somebody who wants to make an impression on developers publishers. I would say many people bought A3 in anticipation and upon completion agree it was a less than game of the year material at least.
So basically, a forum is only worth being a part of if you rebel and refuse to conform ? Otherwise you're some mindless zombie loser?
Wow who knew that forums were all about being haters.


2- I will make whatever claims I wish. I'm not an idiot for making claims you disagree with, and you are the one implying my opinion is inferior which is ironic.

Fanboy.

If liking a game you hate makes one a fanboy, then it makes you troll hater by default.


Less than game of the year material doesn't mean it's horrible. There are a bunch of what I judge to be great games that are not even close to GOTY material. We defend the gamei, but most of us actually don't defend some of the faults you've raised, yet we love the game. Why? Most of the issues raised here besides glitches are only based on preference.

So what if the end results of different weapons are the same? I fist fight all the time now because I think it's cool, not because it's better. I've also used guns for double kills or shot someone I don't bother to wait to get close. Slow reloads prevent me from cheesing my way through.

So true- the same goes for music & movies too. If something isn't 'award winning' it most certainly doesn't detract from its quality or level of enjoyment.
Some of my favorite movies are snubbed by critics - so what. And some of the movies they acclaim, I think totally suck! lol

Also, farlander has alot of good points - esp. about the combat which is NOT harder in previous AC games [unless you're a noob that hasn't gotten the hang of AC combat yet or you're just plain slow at gaming.]

Farlander got this spot on: *>>>even though I personally think that most of your arguments against AC3 are existing problems in previous AC games,
only for some reason you put those problems in a positive light. <<<*

Lastly and most importantly, AC3 did a lot more right than wrong, that's why it's a great game. It's not a crappy game becuz you focus on some of the negatives. There were negatives to find in every past AC game too. I love them all equally yet differently as I do this one and some of the new positives are much better than previous AC's.

pirate1802
11-17-2012, 12:58 PM
Leave it ProdiGurl, its not worth it. :|

At some point whatever they think is their problem, not ours because it doesn't take away from our enjoyment of the game. :D

CRYPTO196
11-17-2012, 01:06 PM
Your thread on the beginning is your opinion and I respect that but in the last paragraphs is clear that you are an idiot(didn't mean to insult you,just a fact).Telling this game is as large as others?
Please you must be on some drugs or even insane(I recommend you to buy Far Cry 3).Frontier itself is bigger than Rome plus Boston and New York are bigger than Venice and Florence.Homestead is even bigger than Monteriggioni.I think that you didn't mean bigger as in locations but bigger in content.No.AC3 has hunting,naval missions,feathers,trinkets,chests,forts,liberation missions,delivery requests,homestead missions and more.So I guess you weren't talking about this either.Probably insanity talking instead of you.Moving on.Connor's story is just as deep as Ezio's.They've both lived through a massive personal tragedy but I must agree with you that I cared more for Ezio than Connor.Desmond moments were more interesting than in other AC games.Glitches and bugs are the only bad thing about this game but they will fix that soon enough.And story pacing.It just moved too fast.

Now don't think that I wanted to insult you.I respect your opinions but when trashing a great game just because it's a big change from the past games and you don't like changes is stupid.

Lexax123
11-17-2012, 01:10 PM
OP never claims his opinions as being facts...hence rendering all "Opinion=/=Facts" moot. So no more need for snarky comments

However he does state his claims are not false, he seems very sure that his opinion is the only correct one. It may not of been clearly said, but it was heavily implied throughout his posts. My snarky-ness comes from the constant stream of people who take this attitude. I have no problem with people who criticize the game fairly and respect other people's opinion (for example I find most of your criticisms understandable and agree with a few of them), but many people have just been plain ignorant. I may have generalized a bit, hence why I put 'general consensus' as well, there is no denying that the OP states that his opinion represents the majority of the community, as he clearly stated.

ProdiGurl
11-17-2012, 01:37 PM
This attitude of indifference towards flaws is even worse than the attitude you describe.

He wrote an essay because he is a fan
He wrote an essay because he would like to see things rectified
He wrote an essay because he wanted to be detailed in his post and cared
He wrote an essay because he spent money on a product without prior trial and the product failed to meet expectations
He wrote an essay because he has every mother****ing right to do so

I hope to go you realize how this attitude indifference towards the quality of games is detrimental to a healthy development of the franchise.

First off, it's not our fault this fan didn't rent it first or watch gameplay/walkthru youtube vids before buying. We all have that option to do so and we all take a risk w/ new games..
I bought on a pre-order and am nothing but happy that I did - I consider myself lucky :p

I think there should be some clarification here - having a RIGHT to do something does not make it the right thing to do or RIGHT in and of itself. I believe he bases his opinions on some false notions and error.... so I think it's more than fair to point that out.
Nor do I have to respect opinions just becuz people hold them (realizing you posted "rights" not "opinion" but I want to clarify it all the same due to other posts I've read).

I respect rights, I do not always respect the actions, opinions or words when one exercises their rights. For instance, I don't respect the terrible opinions of pedophiles & serial killers & many others for obvious reasons. I cannot respect the opinion that murder or rape is justified to commit - just that they have a right to hold a horrible opinion/belief.
I hope you get the point - it's why I used drastic examples.

Also, the fact that people are focusing on the POSITIVES of AC3 [which no doubt in their minds, override the lesser negatives] does not mean they are literally ignoring flaws and I think that is a flaw in your post or perspective on the replies the OP received.
I made an early game Feedback post full of praise, but at the same time I respectfully listed 2 or 3 things I think need to be improved upon.
And that leads me to other point, they created FEEDBACK THREADS for just these issues. But people would rather make stand-alone threads to whine, rant & complain.
Fine - I don't have to like that or want it flooding the board.

If he hates AC3, fine. hate on it. But don't expect me to nod my head like a koolaid drinking sheeple just becuz he ranted and it was his "right" as a fan. It's my right as a fan to point out his faults too. He seems to revel in the idea of non-conformism yet we're supposed to fall in line and conform to his negative opinions in full agreement?? Contradictory imo.

Or that I'm somehow happy to embrace all the negatives about AC. And I'll note that some of your (and/or the OP's) ideas of negatives may not at all be my ideas of what's wrong with it.
Fans are divided as to what they like & dislike about the AC brand these days. That's become painfully obvious every new release imo.

and a ps. this forum area is not supposed to contain any spoilers - I couldn't even read large chunks of the OP.


Sigh... I really think we should start ignoring threads like this.. They are irritating and just make members argue... Overall it just ruins the vibe of what this forum used to be... There are so many people out there that are just itching to give this game a bad reputation.


Leave it ProdiGurl, its not worth it. :|

At some point whatever they think is their problem, not ours because it doesn't take away from our enjoyment of the game. :D

Well... I agree & get it, but at the same time I can't shut up either lol. :nonchalance:

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 02:40 PM
Sorry, man...You are one of the few Criticizers I respect...I`m taking your Advice.. Sorry, Everyone

Hey no need to apologise M. Sometimes you get pissed off...I have...but I'm just saying y'know....we don't need to stoop down to "their" levels. I've read your constructive posts and those always lead to a healthy discussion but everytime you get a lil angry things go downhill....chill, brother ;)

Also, it takes big balls to do what you did..so kudos.

Cheers

UrDeviant1
11-17-2012, 02:46 PM
I agree that the game Is losing It's Identity. That's just my opinion because I felt like this game didn't focus enough on the "Assassin's Creed". The Creed felt like a backdrop to the AMERICAN REVOLUTION. Connor was new to the Creed and yet the writers didn't take that chance to have Achilles give him the history of the Creed (or more so let us witness It). Instead of those Almanac pages, we could of been collecting the lost pages of the brotherhood. I'm just saying I would have loved more references to past Assassins and their struggles, and have Connor relate to Ezio and Altair In some way. Donning the Insignia and hunting Templar's wasn't enough IMO.

However, I did really enjoy the game. Every gameplay aspect of It was Improved upon and I loved the Frontier. The first time I went to 'Black Creek' In the summer with It's lush green vegetation and seeing an Elk "shouting"(:confused:) atop a cliff overlooking a lake was magnificent. So really well done.

BBALive
11-17-2012, 03:04 PM
The combat system is broken. Whether you use your fists or tomahawk or sword or whatever, the end result is the same. You can kick just as much *** using any of the mentioned methods yielding the same result. The only thing resembling a challenge in combat are only really cheap tactics that the enemy uses. Enemies have these random attributes that the game never tells you about and you have to figure out on your own. Regulars can be killed however you like, Officers and grenadiers have to be disarmed after being countered to be killed or by using the bow or gun similarly after a counter, and agiles are only different than regulars if you forget they can't be thrown or disarmed. If you try to kill these enemies in any other way, they simply ho slap you. In previous games the challenge element was in timing your counters. Combat actually used to be challenging, which warranted a reason for running away. Brotherhood introduced chain kills which made the combat flow alot better, but still the combat retained it's difficulty as the timing element was still there and the game threw more enemies at you.

Seriously? I can't keep a straight face when reading this.

PurpleHaze1980
11-17-2012, 03:32 PM
Why I thought this was the worst game of the series (which are my opinions and NOT, I repeat NOT an invitation for a personal attack which always seems to be the case):


* The storylines just...I don't know, didn't add up to the previous games at all. It really feels like it's being made up as it's going along and not necessarily what was originally planned from the storyline started in the first game.

* The controls were by far the worst. Trying to do an aerial assassination was hard enough at times, but trying to run on a horse that gets itself trapped on a half-a-foot-high section of raised terrain is just ridiculous. I constantly found myself without a weapon because it was SO easy to accidentally switch the main weapon while trying to switch the sub-weapon (like the ropedart or the gun, etc), and half the time trying to summon my recruits I ended up just going to the recruit screen instead.

* I didn't really like Connor, he was so...drone like, hardly any emotion, and didn't have much personality (in my opinion, others feel differently). I much more enjoyed playing as Haytham.

* The story jumped about a bit in disjointed segments, the flow didn't feel right somehow.

* Didn't like the homestead business side and micromanaging of making materials to make other materials to make other materials, etc. It was so dull and I couldn't find any shortcuts so I didn't have to keep going through the same menu repetitively to access the same things, etc. It might have been better if the menus had been more accessible (i.e. not having to go through the whole menu to send the same one item to the frontier on a convoy, etc).

* Voice acting = really naff. They made us Scottish sound like the ancestors of Groundskeeper Willy.

* The challenge really seemed to be gone and the whole game felt far too easy. The only challenge is really for trophy junkies. In fact, catching the almenac pages = more challenging than most missions. Even the naval missions were fairly easy (and once you get your upgrades, it's hard to lose).

* Combat was clunky and countering was pretty poor. Slightly challenging, but half of the enemies were easily conquered by a rope dart.

* We've waited all these years for Desmond's story to end this way. Fail.



Since Brotherhood, the series has been letting me down more and more.

shobhit7777777
11-17-2012, 03:48 PM
First off, it's not our fault this fan didn't rent it first or watch gameplay/walkthru youtube vids before buying. We all have that option to do so and we all take a risk w/ new games..
I bought on a pre-order and am nothing but happy that I did - I consider myself lucky :p


You want a fan of the franchise to watch hours of video footage to gauge gameplay? To understand controls and how they feel? To check out the mission structures and design? To understand "tangible" things like combat flow and counters via a video?
Thats unfair don't you think?

And even if he DID rent it...he still has a right to complain. You're not entitled to expressing opinions because you bought the game day one. His opinion, however much you may disagree with him, is equally valid in terms of feedback. He spent time, effort and money on a product which WILL be viewed subjectively since it is a form of art and an entertainment medium....


I respect rights, I do not always respect the actions, opinions or words when one exercises their rights. For instance, I don't respect the terrible opinions of pedophiles & serial killers & many others for obvious reasons. I cannot respect the opinion that murder or rape is justified to commit - just that they have a right to hold a horrible opinion/belief.
I hope you get the point - it's why I used drastic examples.

What you said perfectly applies to your case.

You disagree with OP's opinion and object to his name calling
It is your right to state such
However, stooping down to namecalling and flinging around "Idiots" is not the "right" thing to do is it?
Object to insults, but no need to derail a thread into a Us vs Them with namecalling...and this applies to OP as well.


Also, the fact that people are focusing on the POSITIVES of AC3 [which no doubt in their minds, override the lesser negatives] does not mean they are literally ignoring flaws and I think that is a flaw in your post or perspective on the replies the OP received.
I made an early game Feedback post full of praise, but at the same time I respectfully listed 2 or 3 things I think need to be improved upon.
And that leads me to other point, they created FEEDBACK THREADS for just these issues. But people would rather make stand-alone threads to whine, rant & complain.
Fine - I don't have to like that or want it flooding the board.

I'm well aware of that....but to affect a change there needs to be a LOT of noise, of all frequencies - from the shrill and annoying "I hate this game!!" to the deeper and more thoughtful "Heres where I think the game could've done better".

People will always be outspoken about negative things...thats a fact of life....I don't think folks who genuinely loved AC3 need to try and squish every critical thread? I don't see anyone being snarky or sarcastic on a "POSITIVE" thread....the same courtesy should be reciprocated.


Or that I'm somehow happy to embrace all the negatives about AC. And I'll note that some of your (and/or the OP's) ideas of negatives may not at all be my ideas of what's wrong with it.
Fans are divided as to what they like & dislike about the AC brand these days. That's become painfully obvious every new release imo.

True...but you do agree with me on some broad and general points don't you? This is a general consensus which takes opinions form a wide sample and condenses it into a broader "feedback" stream. With the 'AC3=Awesome" we need "AC3=Sucks" to get a general overview of what went right and what went wrong.
Trust me it'll only lead to even better games.


Lexax

However he does state his claims are not false, he seems very sure that his opinion is the only correct one. It may not of been clearly said, but it was heavily implied throughout his posts. My snarky-ness comes from the constant stream of people who take this attitude. I have no problem with people who criticize the game fairly and respect other people's opinion (for example I find most of your criticisms understandable and agree with a few of them), but many people have just been plain ignorant. I may have generalized a bit, hence why I put 'general consensus' as well, there is no denying that the OP states that his opinion represents the majority of the community, as he clearly stated.

Not after being bullied by the first few replies...he took up a defensive stance..and thats understandable. Had people simply said "Hey Dude, thats not fair calling us insane" I'm 100% sure he would've understood, apologized and we could've moved onto a healthier discussion.

And eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Heres a perfect example of ridicule replacing a well thought out argument which is detrimental to a forum's health:


Seriously? I can't keep a straight face when reading this.

TrueAssassin77
11-17-2012, 04:37 PM
why do i feel dumber after reading the OP post?

twenty_glyphs
11-17-2012, 04:40 PM
There is a horse whistle and there is a way to "filter" stuff on and off on your map.

I'm not going to read the whole thread to see the responses to this, but someone on page 2 said there is a horse whistle and to "pay attention". This game is throwing almost a hundred different things at you at once, so failure to notice a small detail that's barely presented to the player but also an important part of the game is the game's fault, not the player's. There are many features in the game that many players aren't aware of. I'm talking about important core features, not nice to have side systems that are fun to explore on your own.

And the map "filter" is objectively worse than the last 3 games. You can only filter while in the map menu. If you navigate to the logbook, the map icons all reset to the default icons. Also, you can't turn off just the groups of icons you want like the AC2 games — you can only choose between different groups and can't see just the 2 or 3 types of icons that you want to at once. Also, none of the map filters apply to your mini-map like the past 3 games — it always shows every type of icon on your mini-map. In addition to all of that, setting a waypoint on a map icon will show you the distance to the marker in the game, but setting a custom waypoint won't show you the distance to your marker. This is missing functionality from past games.

There are many features like this where AC3 has lost functionality that past games had, and for no good reason. It really does seem like something went wrong in production, but I think the real problem was over ambition, poor planning, lack of scope management and an overconfidence in having so many people and studios to help. Just because you throw a lot of people at something doesn't mean it will get done well. Many of the problems with the game needed more time to iterate and evaluate, not more people to work on them.

twenty_glyphs
11-17-2012, 04:50 PM
What gets me about posts like these is why take the time to write a long review and rant about a game you don't like? Rather then spend hours looking for every minor flaw in the game just so you can write an essay about, why not stop playing? It's simply really. Return the game and stop complaining. I take it you are one of those people that only look at the bad things.

I had a friend like you once. Every time he watched a movie, he would look for all the small things that he could point out that made the movie somehow inaccurate or flawed. You could tell he really enjoyed it because he would always get this smile on his face and he would sound excited every time he was talking to people about all these little mistakes. He would get some sort of pleasure out of criticizing other people's work in a negative manor. I'm certain it was more of an attention thing. As in he wanted more attention and he thought the best way to get it was by tearing apart something someone worked hard on. Now stop trying to get attention by ranting.

Because we want to like the game but were extremely disappointed. Venting makes us feel a little better. Providing constructive criticism on the official forums that are monitored gives us the hope that our voices will be heard and future games will be improved. Expecting us to look forward to something we really liked in the past and then just drop it like it meant nothing to us when it disappoints us is ridiculous.

The "hours" spent looking for flaws is usually just going back and trying to analyze why we didn't like the game. Many of these points just come naturally without spending all my free time looking for flaws. The flaws are literally staring me in the face.

ProdiGurl
11-17-2012, 06:19 PM
You want a fan of the franchise to watch hours of video footage to gauge gameplay? To understand controls and how they feel? To check out the mission structures and design? To understand "tangible" things like combat flow and counters via a video?
Thats unfair don't you think?
Well to be fair, I said rent the game OR watch video footage.
Unfair? Hey, I'm an avid fan of Resident Evil series and I rented both of the latest releases (ORC & 6), watched some videos and really didn't care much for either one of them sadly & probly won't buy one of them at all & maybe will buy RE6 if the price comes down enough.

As for controls etc. , again it's RISK to buy any game at release. We all hope for the best but that doesn't always happen. It's also why I never buy them brand new.
I can't afford the risk (literally). But guess what, at first I didn't even care for the new controls, it wasn't until I got further into using combat that I ended up preferring them over past versions.


And even if he DID rent it...he still has a right to complain. You're not entitled to expressing opinions because you bought the game day one. His opinion, however much you may disagree with him, is equally valid in terms of feedback. He spent time, effort and money on a product which WILL be viewed subjectively since it is a form of art and an entertainment medium....
Well here we go with the "rights" issue again... when did I challenge his rights to post a negative thread? Even Moderators have repeatedly asked that people use the FEEDBACK threads.

And as an AC fan, I also have the same "right" to post my annoyance with the rant threads esp. when I find fault in the premise they base their points on or what I may disagree with. Like the others did. Nobody said they can't post, just that there are designated threads for that.


What you said perfectly applies to your case.

You disagree with OP's opinion and object to his name calling
It is your right to state such
However, stooping down to namecalling and flinging around "Idiots" is not the "right" thing to do is it?
Object to insults, but no need to derail a thread into a Us vs Them with namecalling...and this applies to OP as well.

Yes of course it applies to my case. And yours, and everyone elses - equally. Most forums have to do w/ opinions that not everyone likes or respects (nor has to).
Just that they have a right to one.

Also, I'm responsible for myself & my own posts. I said nothing I don't stand by or think is fair - if you have an issue w/ the other posts, please by all means call them out directly.
But I personally don't believe that showing some anger at what may be stupidity or rudeness is "stooping down" necessarily. Sometimes it's fitting or accurate and should be exposed for what it is in hopes of getting someone to rethink their initial approach.



I'm well aware of that....but to affect a change there needs to be a LOT of noise, of all frequencies - from the shrill and annoying "I hate this game!!" to the deeper and more thoughtful "Heres where I think the game could've done better".
Noise = chronic hate/rant/bash/insult threads? Ok. I see it differently & most of what we've been seeing is just that - only picking out the negatives even if they liked the game as a whole.
But what you keep seeming to forget or miss is that not everyone see's the things being criticized as bad things in the first place.
So it's just as important for me who happens to LIKE something you or others are attacking, to counter it so devs know that alot of us LIKE something & want it kept that way & whatever.
It works both ways and again it goes to division of AC fans vying for the future of the series.
Reminds me of politics.


People will always be outspoken about negative things...thats a fact of life....I don't think folks who genuinely loved AC3 need to try and squish every critical thread? I don't see anyone being snarky or sarcastic on a "POSITIVE" thread....the same courtesy should be reciprocated.

Yes on positive threads they do come in with their attacks - people just shut them down becuz they're more outnumbered (it appears that way)


True...but you do agree with me on some broad and general points don't you? This is a general consensus which takes opinions form a wide sample and condenses it into a broader "feedback" stream. With the 'AC3=Awesome" we need "AC3=Sucks" to get a general overview of what went right and what went wrong.
Trust me it'll only lead to even better games.

Not when the fan base itself is divided on what makes AC great. We saw this w/ ACR's feedback. They come out with AC3 & this is the response Ubi got??
How did it get better with this diverse feedback? They changed things from fan input, then they got attacked for it the next year.
I love & prefer this combat system, but I was seeing a whole lot of attack for the change "if it isn't broke don't fix it". Well why not make it better?

I also don't think it's kool to attack the Devs personally with crap like "you don't care about fans, you don't listen" etc.
Don't expect some of us to just shut up and ignore it. I won't since they aren't coming in here to defend themselves.

The negative stuff that I do agree on, I have openly agreed with in many threads. None of us who love AC3 have said it's perfect & flawless (no game is).
What bothers me at this point is that I see a lot less praise of what they got right.

But alot of the stuff at play here is just personal preference too - stuff like Connor's likeability, his demeanor, other characters, the graphics, the era they chose, clothing, side missions, etc. etc.
Pure opinion on direction.


Not after being bullied by the first few replies...he took up a defensive stance..and thats understandable. Had people simply said "Hey Dude, thats not fair calling us insane" I'm 100% sure he would've understood, apologized and we could've moved onto a healthier discussion.

And eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
Heres a perfect example of ridicule replacing a well thought out argument which is detrimental to a forum's health:

Let me paste his last paragraph.:

>>>Stop defending this game. It is not bigger, that's not why it suffered. Previous Assassins games were just as large. This game is just a **** that Ubi shat out like many of it's games. The Assassins Creed series was different than the others for a time, but it's dead to me now, and dead to anyone else with sense. Even if the next game is an improvement the story is dead, and Assassins Creed has only ever been as addicting for the amount of time it's story has managed to captivate us for.
Sequels are supposed to take things from their predecessors and improve upon them, not **** on them. <<<

I'd first ask for some common sense from posters. Maybe he should grasp that members feel "bullied" when they attack Ubi/Devs, us fans or the game we like & appreciate?
Sometimes you get the same treatment you dish out. I wouldn't come into an official forum & bag on any game like that or tell them if they had any sense, they'd hate it as much as I did. :-0
just out of respect for the members and game creators who pour themselves into each game.

Sometimes there's consequences for the words we choose to use. I don't think fans should have to ignore this with a smile as the negative threads keep rolling in..
If you don't stand up and say anything in defense, you can end up being trampled by negativity - it seems to feed on itself.

All fans of the game have their rights just the same.:) I'll let mods moderate it as they see fit.

Safire224
11-17-2012, 07:50 PM
In my own opinion, everyone is correct in their own way. Many people believe the story line was something that could have been improved upon and I agree with that a bit. Many people think that they should have spent more time on it. And many people think that the overall game was a disappointment. I can say one thing, it was and it wasn't. The fact they managed to incorporate multiple maps that are massive into the game at once is impressive for a AC game. Plus adding all the missions they give you for both land and naval, they may not be very elaborate but they are simple things that make you say "hey, that was pretty cool despite being so simple and small". The combat in the game is much easier to use once you learn how to defeat each enemy because it allows to you flow from enemy to enemy without really trying. So instead of looking jumpy from previous games, you smoothly flow through a sequence of moves while using the rope dart, gun, or any of the other amazing weapons they allow to you. They attempted to give players a new experience completely from previous games and they told people that it would be different, and that they wouldn't keep an aspect just because it had been in the game before. I will say one thing though, I agree that they should have waited a bit to iron out many of the annoying glitches that players face currently, but all those glitches were from them extending beyond what they had previously done in other games to give players something new to use and keep it fresh. I know this game was disappointing in many ways, but they also accomplished a great deal by taking the risk. I commend the team on their hard work, and hopefully they will strive to fulfill the players' wishes with the next game. The fighting is no way to solve this problem and feel it will accomplish nothing if we continue to become angry. I personally enjoyed the game for what it is, and hope they strive for new heights in the next chapter of the story.

vivaxardas
11-17-2012, 07:57 PM
Well, the title of this thread "Why Assassins Creed 3 is the worst of the SERIES", not the worst game of all times. We had a poll here a week ago, to rank AC games from best to worst. Quite a few people, including me, ranked AS3 the last, so for quite a few people IT IS THE WORST game in the series. But it is the worst game in the BEST game series, at least for me. It is still quite terrific, really. I already got over a sloppy story line and sub-par characters, and now I simply enjoy the stuff I like in AC3. Still much better to have AC3 then not to have it, and for me it is wa-a-a-ay better then any 2012 game.

A-p-o-l-l-y-o-n
11-18-2012, 02:47 AM
Well as much as people love the game, there have been quite a few threads spewing hate for the game. Haven't actually played it yet (waiting on the PC version), but from looking at walkthroughs I think the game could have been better. IDK, I think Connor as he is portrayed could have been much better. I didn't like his naiveté that kinda persists throughout the game. It was fine at first, but he never loses it. I didn't like how he was so pro-Patriot, even though I'm an American. And, yeah, he was very pro-Patriot, anti-British. Biggest thing for me was the voice-actor's performance, and really, the voice actors for all the Native American characters. I felt they were lacking. They were a little too monotone for me. Kinda like Altair. They weren't as monotone as him, but they just seemed a little dry to me. Could be just me. Just a personal preference really. Definitely not the worst in the series. I would say that AC has gotten better as the games have come along. One, because the technology and gameplay mechanics have improved. Two, because the stories have become more involved, and deeper. That said, I liked the Assassins as an order the best in AC1, mainly because the Order has become more diminished as the games have progressed. I mean, it's cool that they added an Assassin Brotherhood feature in Brotherhood, but I think it should have featured more in the stories. IDK, I just didn't like the whole "only one Assassin" thing from AC2 to ACIII, because for all intensive purposes, Ezio and Connor were alone, whereas in AC1, while you focused on Altair, there was a full-fledged Assassin Order that was out as Assassins. The Templars are the best (best meaning developed, complicated, most "gray area") in AC1 and AC3. Basically, I feel as the Assassins have gotten less interesting as the Templars kinda got more interesting in ACIII. I think that there are elements that are the worst. I think Abstergo is the worst bad guy in the series, in all the games, because they are so stereotypical. I think the Assassin's as an Order are the worst. I think Connor personality-wise is the worst, bout near Altair. Just boring to listen to IMO. Altair made up for it because he was cocky and arrogant. Connor's being naive is annoying to me :p. Ezio was the freshest to me. He dealt with tragedy (losing his father and brothers), but still wasn't moody and angry all the time. I think Haytham really adds to the story, so that's a plus for ACIII, even if his part was too long. But definitely not the worst in the series. I honestly can't say there's one game that's the worst.

heythat1dude
07-04-2013, 10:52 PM
Continue to make a fool of yourself..I never said your opinion was Inferior..I simply thought you were an Idiot who thinks he`s the most Intelligent person on this forum..

Please, I`m entertained..

You`re an Idiot who cannot read...Most people liked the game.. Get Mad.

You come here thinking your King, claiming ANYONE who enjoyed the game is Insane while you`re a Very smart person who knows better.. Guess what ? No one is You...Not even other people who hated the game have that Attitude...They`re respectful and constructive..

You ? You`re a just a little brat who thinks he`s the Child every mother wants. Your post is full of cuss, disrespectful and has points that are WRONG...not Opinion.. JUST WRONG.. False..You obviously have not played the game enough, because you have got some working to do on your facts..

I`m a Fan-boy...at least i`m not you
^What a petulant hypocrite...but anyway, I agree with pretty much all gotohave said, though the modern story didn't bother me, the historical one definitely was lacking compared to other AC games. Connor was very monotone, and not very independent either, while his missions were very linear. Also the game mechanics in this game suffered a major blow even since the last game. Worse, the system seems very contradictory (something works one second then fails the next). For example countering fails to initiate most of the time, even against regulars. Overall I find myself frustrated at the fall of, up till this time, one of my favorite series. Waiting to hear if ACIV has changed at all before I buy it. I have heard rumors so far that they are fixing the linearity, and I also liked Kenway for the little we got to play as him, so things are looking up for ACIV.

heythat1dude
07-04-2013, 10:54 PM
Because we want to like the game but were extremely disappointed. Venting makes us feel a little better. Providing constructive criticism on the official forums that are monitored gives us the hope that our voices will be heard and future games will be improved. Expecting us to look forward to something we really liked in the past and then just drop it like it meant nothing to us when it disappoints us is ridiculous.

The "hours" spent looking for flaws is usually just going back and trying to analyze why we didn't like the game. Many of these points just come naturally without spending all my free time looking for flaws. The flaws are literally staring me in the face.
I also think he aims for improvement. In the hopes that his voice will be joined by others, and Ubisoft will correct what he didn't like. He obviously enjoyed revelations, so it isn't the series itself he hates. Rather the direction it took.

heythat1dude
07-04-2013, 11:05 PM
However he does state his claims are not false, he seems very sure that his opinion is the only correct one. It may not of been clearly said, but it was heavily implied throughout his posts. My snarky-ness comes from the constant stream of people who take this attitude. I have no problem with people who criticize the game fairly and respect other people's opinion (for example I find most of your criticisms understandable and agree with a few of them), but many people have just been plain ignorant. I may have generalized a bit, hence why I put 'general consensus' as well, there is no denying that the OP states that his opinion represents the majority of the community, as he clearly stated.
Um, last time I checked a claim is something (in this case an opinion) that is asserted as factual, so why would you state them to be false out the door? Or even entertain the notion? He put up what he believes is true for a debate. Rather than argue that he is any number of horrible slimy things, why not just counter the parts of his argument you don't like? Now just for clarity could you explain what was meant by ignorant? Ignorant of their own opinions?

markd1159
07-12-2013, 06:47 AM
Well, I just bought a PS3 about two weeks ago and I picked up both AC2 and AC3. I loved AC2. Graphics were gorgeous, the gameplay was enjoyable, the story was great, the main character was fun to play. I felt motivated to build up the hometown of Montereggione, and to investigate and explore the other areas. I enjoyed the secondary characters, the little side jokes, the puzzles, just about everything in the game. Even when it was tough (opening some of those tombs), I felt rewarded with great graphics and a lot of fun.

I then decided to play AC3. To me, I felt like it was lacking much of what I liked about the older game. The graphics are great, true, but overall the game just lacked style in my opinion. The missions felt clunky, the plot was heavy handed, the main character is about as charismatic as the neighbor's ugly dog (I liked Hawthorne better!). I also didn't like the combat play as much in AC3, but that may be due to me not having played games in a long time, and AC2 had a simpler, more straightforward style of fighting. I miss the many jumping and climbing special abilities, even though they were hard to pull off sometimes because once mastered they were fun. I dragged myself through most of AC3, hating a lot of the missions, basically just doing thing to get through them in hopes of better things to come, but they never really did. Ultimately, I ended up with this:
http://imageshack.us/a/img829/4207/6iab.jpg
I know some of you may like AC3 a lot. I'm not saying you're wrong. But I HATED it. I felt betrayed after finishing AC2. I felt like the game was just bad. Really bad. Superman N64 bad.

Assassin_M
07-13-2013, 07:51 AM
^What a petulant hypocrite...but anyway, I agree with pretty much all gotohave said, though the modern story didn't bother me, the historical one definitely was lacking compared to other AC games. Connor was very monotone, and not very independent either, while his missions were very linear. Also the game mechanics in this game suffered a major blow even since the last game. Worse, the system seems very contradictory (something works one second then fails the next). For example countering fails to initiate most of the time, even against regulars. Overall I find myself frustrated at the fall of, up till this time, one of my favorite series. Waiting to hear if ACIV has changed at all before I buy it. I have heard rumors so far that they are fixing the linearity, and I also liked Kenway for the little we got to play as him, so things are looking up for ACIV.
Go check up Hypocrite in the dictionary, sonny...we`re all Hypocrites...just nothing in the post you quoted is hypocritical...

mrubio007
07-13-2013, 08:55 AM
Really nice review here, you took your time right? Well let me tell you something with all the respect your opinion deserves ( because everybody"s opinion is not make equal) there are some things that are wrong. For example there is a whistle for your horse, you can kill every single type of enemy with only one shoot if you are close enough and if you get the last pistol you will get two shoots per pistol which is a very big advantage if you get surrounded. Another thing, the "invisible walls" that the guards make to stop you, you can actually brake them if you hold R1 and press X before reaching the wall, you will just jump and pass through. The economy in the game is much more fun than the one in previous games. ACB and ACR, was so easy to get money and a lot of money, you have to do NOTHING, simple, but here you have to work to get the items or just spend money which is the main purpose of the economy in this game: trading. Crafting is really good too it makes you work to get upgrades and as a fact THE UPGRADES WORK. If you upgrade your weapons you will need less hits to kill your targets and you will unleash a larger combo too. In other things I'm agree with you, bugs, glitches, some graphic issues. Desmod's dead has a purpose, he has to set free Juno ( I think that's the name of the woman) in order to save the world but he has to sacrifice himself to set her free. And that's what he did. I really enjoyed the game, the graphics, the new climbing system the abilities of the recruits, the hunting stuff and even the change of the seasons. The character is not my favorite I prefer Ezio, his story is more dense and touch much more the players ( of course it started as a vengeance, who doesn't like that?) the character had a better personality and was a badass too, Altair had a pretty history too. But that's who Connor is, and i think it was made on purpose to give a change to the characters and a new story with a character more aggressive, more cold but with the same willing to stay true to the creed and fight against the oppression of the templars. Also this game has some funny stuff too ( if you get behind the right back corner of your house in the hill and you whistle, a turkey comes out and if you press -up up down down left right left right O X- you can put a hood to the turkey and is THE TURKEY ASSASSIN lol) this was very funny and some conversations are funny too. Now regarding your behavior please don't call names on people who really like the game because it was a good game including the naval thing. Be respectful and if you don't like the game well don't play it anymore and I repeat everybody's opinion is not make equal, and those who defend the game are not fanboys are just people who defentd their opinions and their beliefs and the things they like. So be respectful and before you post any other thing make sure that the facts you are using are correct because some of them are not, so they are not facts. Have a good day and i recommend you to buy Assassin's Creed VI Black Flag it has some new things and is full of surprises.

MAzing87
07-15-2013, 06:58 PM
I just started playing AC 3 again. I stopped playing because of the issue of triggering some of the missions (Benedict Arnold dlc), would freeze my ps3. I didn't realize how much you can do in the game. The different variety of missions, hunting, crafting, is great and will keep me busy. I don't like the combat so much. I don't think I ever did. There's just no fluidity to combat, "in my opinion". I can only compare the combat to Batman series. The combat in Arkham games were the 3Fs, flawless, fluid, and fun. I have always wanted the combat in AC series to be just as good if not better. But combat in AC is just clunky. Also the constant framerate drop for the game to load up the environment has been bad. It happens a bit often. Another downside is that with so many different things to do in the AC environment, the game does a poor job to explain the many different things you can really do. If anyone can help me find a complete guide or link anywhere online that details all the things you can do in the game, I'd greatly appreciate it.

Do I agree with the OP's opinion that AC3 is the worst of the series? No. While most of what I pointed out as flaws are disappointing, they don't make the game unplayable (except for the triggering missions issue to which looks to be resolved). Overall, I'm having a good time with the game. I dont want to be called insane for liking it, nor I don't want to be praised by others who loves it.

I'm a gamer.

Ureh
07-15-2013, 11:34 PM
Thank you for sharing your thoughts MAzing87.

I haven't played any of the Arkham games yet, I'll have to give Origins a try after it's released.

Kytr
07-18-2013, 11:14 PM
AC3 is definitely the worst game in the series. The controls are far worse than the earlier games -- trying to make things "simple" they actually made it more difficult to control your actions. The characters are much less interesting than earlier games and the story is both forced and bland. Some of the options that were added (such as hunting) had some novelty value, but were not terribly interesting beyond the initial tries. Worse, the most amusing element in the AC2 games, walking up to 4 guards and killing them all before they could react, is gone. Double assassinations are almost impossible (they must be done from the air or in high profile), and assassinating standing guards with a hidden blade almost impossible as they will turn and attack before you reach them.

I have played through the other 4 games multiple times. I doubt I will play AC3 again. It's just not that fun.

Assassin_M
07-19-2013, 05:08 AM
AC3 is definitely the worst game in the series. The controls are far worse than the earlier games -- trying to make things "simple" they actually made it more difficult to control your actions. The characters are much less interesting than earlier games and the story is both forced and bland. Some of the options that were added (such as hunting) had some novelty value, but were not terribly interesting beyond the initial tries. Worse, the most amusing element in the AC2 games, walking up to 4 guards and killing them all before they could react, is gone. Double assassinations are almost impossible (they must be done from the air or in high profile), and assassinating standing guards with a hidden blade almost impossible as they will turn and attack before you reach them.

I have played through the other 4 games multiple times. I doubt I will play AC3 again. It's just not that fun.
All I read was "Waaaa..game is harder so it sucks..waaaaaa"


Double assassinations are almost impossible (they must be done from the air or in high profile)
Nope...they can be done from the ground too

Ureh
07-19-2013, 01:45 PM
is gone. Double assassinations are almost impossible (they must be done from the air or in high profile)

Nope...they can be done from the ground too

High profile = ground. It's just that you can't double assassinate without risk of alerting nearby guards anymore. I actually like this in some ways because it's a bit more tactical (should I use it? can I use it?!). But they do replace it with the "moving" assassination, which is more overpowered than the double assassination, imo (basically move connor and hold the attack button).

Samur80
07-22-2013, 11:05 AM
I don't agree with everything OP here says, but I do believe that AC3 is the worst of the series. The characterisation of Connor was well...crap. It just seemed like such an after thought. And since we'd just come off the back of following Ezio's entire life, which was well crafted and enriched the game so much, this just doesn't stack up.

The game is glitch as all hell at times too. It felt like such a drag to play. For the first time in the series, it felt like a chore to play.

The only thing I genuinely enjoyed about the game was the sea-based stuff. Something a bit different and a welcome break from the monotony of the game.

kiyoxkyo
08-11-2013, 07:21 PM
Just because Connor wasn't so open and easy going like Ezio, he's automatically bashed. Get over it, he's a different character, his personality is different and if you don't want changes, get back to playing AC2, Brotherhood and Revelations since you don't even want to welcome new stories and characters.
I feel like some people don't even want to give it a try because the main protagonist isn't Ezio. Sure, he was a great characters and I enjoyed it very much, but Connor's story is also just as good as previous Assassin's.
The facts that some people stated are half true, and in my opinion you're just overreacting since they actually changed something.
And you obviously don't like change, let it stay the same forever and not bring anything new ever in the future.

Crazy_Vantage
09-27-2013, 10:57 PM
All I read was "Waaaa..game is harder so it sucks..waaaaaa"


And all I hear is "waaaa.. people are criticising a game I like!.. waaaaa"

AC3 was a ****ing awful game compared to the previous ones in the series. Build a bridge and get over it.


Just because Connor wasn't so open and easy going like Ezio, he's automatically bashed. Get over it, he's a different character, his personality is different and if you don't want changes, get back to playing AC2, Brotherhood and Revelations since you don't even want to welcome new stories and characters.
I feel like some people don't even want to give it a try because the main protagonist isn't Ezio. Sure, he was a great characters and I enjoyed it very much, but Connor's story is also just as good as previous Assassin's.
The facts that some people stated are half true, and in my opinion you're just overreacting since they actually changed something.
And you obviously don't like change, let it stay the same forever and not bring anything new ever in the future.

Nice strawmen bro. People didn't hate Connor because he wasn't Ezio... he was hated because he was nowhere near as interesting, likeable, or well-developed as Ezio. You say that people disliked Connor because he "wasn't so open and easy going", yet most people love Altair who was much more like Connor than Ezio. Connor's story was absolutely abysmal. That's not because it wasn't Ezio's, I judge it on its own merits or lack thereof. Not only is he blindingly stupid and impulsive, basically going "MUH FREEDUMS" the entire game to the detriment of everyone else, he's intensely unlikeable, being unfriendly at best or seriously aggressive at worst to all the other major characters that Ubisoft tried to introduce. Yeah yeah you can handwave it away with "But he's native American and he's angry about stuff" IDGAF, maybe they should have thought about that before writing him. I'm not obliged to like him. Aside from both those glaring faults, there's zero character development through the entire game. In AC2, you see Ezio begin as an arrogant womaniser, but after watching his father and brother publicly hanged in front of him and betrayed by those he trusted, donning the Assassin's hood, he becomes a more mature man, learning diplomacy and increasing his physical ability, and his personality was greatly developed in Brotherhood and Revelations. Connor has none of this. He's no different at the end of the game than at the beginning. He hasn't matured, grown emotionally, reached some kind of intellectual understanding of his, the Assassin's, or the Templar's motivations or the cause they are fighting for... he's still just blindly running around hitting stuff and acting like a moody teenager.

Maybe you liked him. I'm not going to say you can't like him or that you're some kind of idiot for it, that's totally up to you. But if you can honestly read what I said and not see a grain of truth in it then you're as bad as the strawmen you've conjured up, because what I pointed out and what others have pointed out are valid complaints, which Ubisoft evidently agree with because they've ditched him for Edward, who appears to be a much more interesting character. Maybe this time we'll actually get some interesting side-characters too.

And honestly I agree with a load of what OP said about the game. It was definitely the worst in the series for me, coming from a guy who shelled out about £60 for the pre-orderer of the Join or Die edition... The cities were very, very boring. Lacking in verticality, which was an absolute hallmark of the AC series, and variety in equal measure. And, though I enjoyed the Frontier, there was a lack of substance to it. There was little reason to actually fully explore it, particularly towards the centre of the map. I did really enjoy the level in the abandoned mansion though, that was very creative. There was only one good character in the game, which was Achilles. Not a single other character could even nearly match the heights that characters like Leonardo, Sofia, Machiavelli, Rodrigo Borgia, or even the recurring legend himself, Duccio. There were so many characters alongside Ezio that made the storyline so involving for many of us, and AC3 just completely lacked that. In terms of actual gameplay, it was very lacking as well. As OP noted, the controls are really awkward. It's so easy to accidentally start running up a wall when you're supposed to be chasing someone, and then you press O to try and drop down, and suddenly he's hanging down motionless, and you try to press O again to drop but you've been holding the left stick forwards and so he then climbs up before he can drop. Just one example. The combat itself is unbelievably boring. Not only did they totally **** up with the weapon switcher, there's still no reason to improve your weapons and it's just a Counter fest still, but an easier one than before. The assassin's are almost entirely non-existent, both in storyline and gameplay. You can browse this forum and find dozens of people who literally did not know they could make use of assassins in the game. It was a total afterthought. The missions themselves were just... ugh. Everyone already knows the usual complaints about the tedious opening with Edward's father, but there were other awful ones as well. The 'midnight right' can **** right off, as can the horrifically bad insult to gaming that was the chase scene towards the end of the game. Way too many fetch and guard quests as well. The game was just a mess in so many ways.

Assassin_M
10-03-2013, 11:29 PM
And all I hear is "waaaa.. people are criticising a game I like!.. waaaaa"

AC3 was a ****ing awful game compared to the previous ones in the series. Build a bridge and get over it


Try being original, sonny...using the same words I used in a pathetic effort to seem smart wont get you anywhere...at least not anywhere useful...

No, AC III was not an awful to ME...there, see?? I gave my opinion on his opinion, which probably isn't fathomable to you, but that's how things run here *gasp*..funny how you say I should "build a bridge and get over it" when you're the one acting like a baby, judging by your pretentious post that reeks of "Nya nya i'm right and you're all wrong nyaaaaa"

So yeah, play somewhere else