• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Kotaku: "How Has Assassin’s Creed III Disappointed Me? Let Me Count The Ways."

K

kayos90

Tragic victim of fan death
I know Kotaku gets a lot of hate but hear me out before automatically discounting things. Kirk makes many points that I agree with and his analysis is spot on with certain things. Some key quotes that I cannot deny at all. Feel free to discuss to your hearts content on whether you agree or not.

The interface in Assassin's Creed III is far too sluggish. Everything moves slower than it should. Weapon selection is a disaster—like many games, you press RB to open up a menu that allows you to switch between your various tools. But instead of popping up an easy quick-select radial menu, the game pauses, zooms out to an entirely separate menu, then lets you move up and down a list of items, rather than around in a circle.
Click to expand...

Assassin's Creed III takes place during the American Revolution, during historical events that most people, at least most Americans, are much more familiar with. As a result, the story starts to have a Forrest Gump-y quality that feels more distracting than cool. You say Paul Revere went on a famous ride? Well actually, Connor rode with him! You say the British won a bloody victory at Bunker Hill? Well actually, Connor was there, and snuck across the enemy lines! You say the Colonials held the British at the north bridge in Concord? Well actually, Connor commanded the troops and told them when to fire! Why did he do this? Because the Colonial commanding officer decided to trust this random guy with the task.
Click to expand...

Source: http://kotaku.com/5958941/how-has-assassins-creed-iii-disappointed-me-let-me-count-the-ways
 
You can apply most of these to most Assassin's Creed games in my opinion. You have to temper your expectations a bit because the developmental teams for the franchise have a myriad of issues that they haven't figured out yet.

Even still, while they're not for everyone, I enjoy them. Except Revelations of course, which didn't need to be made outside of MP.

I also had no problem with the "Forrest Gump" shit. It's a game, first and foremost. I found those sections to be the highlights of the experience, because they were fun.
 
Read this last night after a particularly frustrating night with ACIII. I'm not yet willing to call it "not fun," but his experience on most of the other points mirrors my own. I can't count the number of frustrating bugs I've run into in my first 7 hours or so, and I seem to have to hear a frequently repeated, irritating and/or broken voice clip from an NPC about once per hour.

Edit: This is coming from a fan of the series. How this game is buggier than the games they developed in 12 months boggles my mind.
 
It's amazing how I've gone from loving AC2 to not even finishing AC3. I got a few hours into it, and returned it back to Blockbuster. The yearly installments have completely burned me out on that series.
 
ViewtifulJC said:
It's amazing how I've gone from loving AC2 to not even finishing AC3. I got a few hours into it, and returned it back to Blockbuster. The yearly installments have completely burned me out on that series.
Click to expand...

I don't think the yearly installment is the case for me. I had to finish the game for review and such but I enjoyed 2 but didn't enjoy AC3 all that much as well.
 
This is now the third article I've read in games media about AC3 sucking. If only more reviewers felt that way.
 
I'm several hours in and I have not been digging it so far. I like a lot of the ideas and stuff, but it's just not clicking. I 100% agree that replacing the radial menu for items/weapons is an absolute disaster. Brotherhood is still the pinnacle for me.
 
Zarovitch said:
I was hype to take this game for the WiiU, but this game don't seem to be good at all.
Click to expand...

Actually I feel like I Should have waited for the wii u version. Those menu issues are solved right on the gamepad, do complaint #1 above is already fixed. I think it has real time weapon switching?
 
I agree with most of the stuff that's written. There was definitely something missing compared to the other AC games, it's simply not that fun.
 
Meisadragon said:
I agree with most of the stuff that's written. There was definitely something missing compared to the other AC games, it's simply not that fun.
Click to expand...

What I felt the game was missing is a cohesive vision. I believe the individual ideas sound great on paper but when it comes to executing it by combining all the parts together, it just doesn't work all that well.
 
B-Dex said:
But what was their review of ACIII like? Did it mention any of these things?
Click to expand...

How is that relevant though? Different people perceive things differently and accept it differently. Sure some things in games can be analyzed objectively but not all things.
 
John Harker said:
Actually I feel like I Should have waited for the wii u version. Those menu issues are solved right on the gamepad, do complaint #1 above is already fixed. I think it has real time weapon switching?
Click to expand...

Nintendo killer feature... Real Time Weapon change? In a game based on real history?
 
kayos90 said:
What I felt the game was missing is a cohesive vision. I believe the individual ideas sound great on paper but when it comes to executing it by combining all the parts together, it just doesn't work all that well.
Click to expand...

I would have been happy with that if it was at least a fun mess. I feel like the tone and just the general gameplay isn't as fun as Brotherhood or 2. Ezio was just so fun and interesting, I mean he wasn't the deepest character ever, but at least he wasn't a complete asshole all the time that just is constantly a dick.
 
The inventory menu is a genuine complaint in my opinion, considering the last AC I played, AC 2, had everything on a circle interface. The rest is not a problem for me and I'm still planning to get it on Wii U at launch.
 
I'm actually playing AC2 on PC right now with a 360 controller and I find this weird:

The interface in Assassin's Creed III is far too sluggish. Everything moves slower than it should. Weapon selection is a disaster—like many games, you press RB to open up a menu that allows you to switch between your various tools. But instead of popping up an easy quick-select radial menu, the game pauses, zooms out to an entirely separate menu, then lets you move up and down a list of items, rather than around in a circle.
Click to expand...

Considering AC2 has the wheel option for selecting equipment.
 
Mrbob said:
I'm actually playing AC2 on PC right now with a 360 controller and a find this weird:



Considering AC2 has the wheel option for selecting equipment.
Click to expand...

Why fix what wasn't broken? I don't know.

Then again, this is the same company that pushed a tower defense mini-game to the forefront in the last installment.
 
I thought it was terrible. I can happily call myself a fan of the franchise - enjoyed 1, loved 2 and Brotherhood, thought Redemption was okay - but this one I really disliked. The lag was horrific, the sense of being an assassin not there. It was set pieces driven rather than emergence driven. The story was awful - and I've even quite enjoyed that in the past - and the stuff I was coming to enjoy (refurbishing cities, owning shops, buying weapons etc) either totally gone or just pointless. I finished 3, but never once hunted outside the tutorial, did no shopping. There was no need for the economy. The sea battles were bullshitty and fel shoehorned in. (Wouldn't be shocked if Ubi has a cancelled Pirate game somewhere, and saw a way to reuse assets, frankly.) And the ending? The less said about that the better.
 
Meisadragon said:
I agree with most of the stuff that's written. There was definitely something missing compared to the other AC games, it's simply not that fun.
Click to expand...

For a while I thought it was amazing, but you can just feel it groaning under the weight of it's own ambitions and various development teams. There are so many elements they couldn't even balance the game properly and made everything on the side optional, and therefore meaningless. If they forced you to upgrade the homestead or weapons in order to make your character stronger or made them more RPG elements that would increase your level or something it would have been much more compelling.
 
Mrbob said:
I'm actually playing AC2 on PC right now with a 360 controller and a find this weird:



Considering AC2 has the wheel option for selecting equipment.
Click to expand...

It's a complete and monumental step back from 2 and Brotherhood. Completely dead-stops gameplay, and it makes no sense for two reasons; one being that I think they would have noticed how it completely slows the game down and ruins a lot of the flow, especially when a lot of items are a neccesity, and two, they had the weapon and item wheels completely done well in 2 and Brotherhood, if I remember correctly.
 
The only disappointing things about the game for me are the extra activities. They're all so poorly explained and even when you figure them out they just feel thrown in there.

The crafting and convoy stuff is just arduous to deal with. Why is there not an option to add all of one item to a convoy? I have to individually select 12 beaver pelts. It's annoying and makes me not bother. Same with the crafting. If I need an item that someone on the homestead sells why not just let me buy it from the crafting menu? The brotherhood stuff is just put so out of way and never mentioned even once. I stumbled upon it by accident. Also it's so stripped down now. One of my favorite things in Brotherhood was leveling up my guys with missions and outfitting them.

It's a shame because I enjoy almost everything else about the game. Especially the naval combat.
 
I mostly liked the game, but it's hard to disagree with a lot of those.

Honestly, if Revelations hadn't existed and they instead poured those resources in to polishing up AC3 (a game that likely stands high on the list of glitchiest games this generation), it would have been a better result for Ubisoft than tarnishing the brand with this clearly QA-less title.
 
Izick said:
It's a complete and monumental step back from 2 and Brotherhood. Completely dead-stops gameplay, and it makes no sense for two reasons; one being that I think they would have noticed how it completely slows the game down and ruins a lot of the flow, especially when a lot of items are a neccesity, and two, they had the weapon and item wheels completely done well in 2 and Brotherhood, if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

The only thing I'd knock the radial menu for in AC2 is because you have more than eight items to scroll through, you can accidentally select something you didn't intend to. Other than that, though, it was smooth and quick.
 
I just finished AC3 and...if it doesn't leave a sour taste in your mouth by the halfway point,
Sequence 12
certainly will. I was shocked at how underwhelming and frustrating the last missions and resolution are.

Overall, I find the game is janky as hell and certainly won't sell any GAF newcomers/tourists on the series. Even Revelations with all its tower defense and useless bomb crafting was more enjoyable.
 
Read this article earlier, and while I'm not far enough into the game yet to really judge it myself, he makes some great points that I can see eventually taking issue with. Sad that this particular entry in my favorite series seems like such a B-level game.
 
Glad to see people pointing out these faults after the game scored so well across the board. AC3 is a definite step back for the series
 
Probably the most disappointing element of it all (to me) is the half-baked trading and crafting systems. Putting barriers on when your artisans can level really ruins the experience of the game since, as with most AC games, you need money at the beginning and not in like the near-end portions of the game (where you probably have like £30,000 from doing just the main missions, naval missions, etc.)
 
Ridley327 said:
Why fix what wasn't broken? I don't know.

Then again, this is the same company that pushed a tower defense mini-game to the forefront in the last installment.
Click to expand...

It was meant as a portable game initially which explains why it feels so unnecessary, at least it still had the solid components of 2 and brotherhood to support it.

I love the series but man 3 really hurts it's momentum. It feels like two different games that never got fleshed out and were rushed to meet a deadline. I honestly think it is even worse than 1 and that is saying something. They took out mechanics that were good in the previous titles and replaced them with broken mechanics, the map is nearly incomprehensible, and the story is a complete mess.

AC:B>AC2>AC:R>AC>AC3

I regret buying this game.
 
This game reviewed much better than it deserved, it's a glitchy unpolished mess with a lot of random and bad missions and overall not very fun.

There are some things the game doesn't even mention well, I didn't know I could use LB button to send my assassins on missions until after I beat the story :\

Side missions in this game other than naval stuff are not fun at all. The liberation missions are as dull and repetitive as those investigations in AC1 and you have to do them if you want to get you assassin recruits, they made this far more painful than previous games where you only had to free a citizen to recruit him/her, now your assassins are unique instead not generic characters, but you have to go through a lot of filler to get them. The AI in letter swap missions, oh so horrible. if he sees you he sits there and watch for a while. All the chasing and following in open world game usually are bad, this game made them even worse with it's really bad AI.

Letter delivery missions, what's the point of these again? I have no idea still.

There are just too many guard in a given area in cities at any time and AI is shakiest of all games, it's just not fun anymore to do things in cities, it's not tuned well at all.

They changed the controls and menus just for the sake of changing, there is no new functionality, it's same but now controls worse than ever and the original logic behind the controls is gone to gain nothing instead.

Free running is bugged I think. climbing isn't as smooth as before. feels off.

introduced horrible horrible mini games, like the frustrating lockpicking, this is the worst lockpicking in my recent memory. I think only Oblivion had a worse lockpicking.

Outside of cities which are only boredom and frustration, there is frontier and homestead. Homestead missions aren't offensive but aren't fun either, they are ok I guess. the result is like poor man's RDR but with none of the great vistas or good characters.

overall this game was pretty bad outside of some moments of brilliance in the main story which were mostly marred by poor throw away mission designs and horrible conclusion to the disjointed mess of a plot. The only part that I really enjoyed were the naval mission because I really like ships of this era and the gameplay although basic was quite fun and a good audio/visual experience, far better than anything else in the game.
 
The game has moments of brilliance, but sadly it's bogged down in places by horrific design. I still overall enjoyed the game, and really hope we get a Brotherhood-like sequel that's more focused and consistent.
 
Assassin's Creed III takes place during the American Revolution, during historical events that most people, at least most Americans, are much more familiar with. As a result, the story starts to have a Forrest Gump-y quality that feels more distracting than cool. You say Paul Revere went on a famous ride? Well actually, Connor rode with him! You say the British won a bloody victory at Bunker Hill? Well actually, Connor was there, and snuck across the enemy lines! You say the Colonials held the British at the north bridge in Concord? Well actually, Connor commanded the troops and told them when to fire! Why did he do this? Because the Colonial commanding officer decided to trust this random guy with the task.
Click to expand...

I dont like this argument.

On the surface - Assassins Creed biggest thing has always been the locals. Rome, renaissance, the holy lands, american revolution.

this series has taken us places we've never been before. historical accuracy would not necessarily make for a great game. I give AC leeway in my head. They are trying to create a wacky and crazy but ultimately compelling fiction that allows them to jump from place to place and in and out of time.
it was the same for the others. In AC2 Leonardo Da Vinci makes ezio a flying machine. obviously, there is so many common-knowledge alternative-history breakers, that its cruel and unfair to blatantly blame AC3. I feel its reaching. I havent played the game though and I am not an american.

I simply feel its unfair to dismiss the fiction this late in the series. It's the fifth game for sushis sake.
 
5 games in the guy has a problem with the main character interacting with historical figures?

lmao, surely nailing the Slowtaku there.


...unless he think's Leonardo DaVinci actually helped his Assassin buddy fly around Venice using bonfires to stay aloft.
 
AkuMifune said:
For a while I thought it was amazing, but you can just feel it groaning under the weight of it's own ambitions and various development teams. There are so many elements they couldn't even balance the game properly and made everything on the side optional, and therefore meaningless. If they forced you to upgrade the homestead or weapons in order to make your character stronger or made them more RPG elements that would increase your level or something it would have been much more compelling.
Click to expand...

When I started the game it felt so overwhelming, so many things to do. It's clear that they wanted to give as many options to the players as they could, cram the game with a lot of content, but in a way it sort of backfired. Considering the amount of glitches the game has, you could tell it was rushed and needed more time in the oven. I think in a way they couldn't glue all the game mechanics together.

I agree yeah, they should have designed it in a way where you get attached to the main character. I beat the game with just the Assassin tomahawk and blades, everything else was pointless.

I loved the naval battles though, almost all the missions were exhilarating.
 
I figured I wasn't liking AC3 just because I was burnt out on the series, but nope.

Went back and replayed AC2 instead and it's just more polished and better in almost every way. The ONLY things that are preventing me from just giving up on AC3 forever are the fantastic tree running and the great art direction/setting.
 
miladesn said:
This game reviewed much better than it deserved, it's a glitchy unpolished mess with a lot of random and bad missions and overall not very fun.

There are some things the game doesn't even mention well, I didn't know I could use LB button to send my assassins on missions until after I beat the story :\
Click to expand...

WHAT!?! Jesus christ, how did they think not mentioning that was a good idea?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

RTTP: Assassins Creed III : Colonial Wars
20
434
Soodanim replied
Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced has gone gold
Hype 
2
160
Hideous Snake replied
Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced: The Final Preview (IGN)
31
494
Lokaum D+ replied
Convince me, how’s the PS portal?
2 3 4
160
2K
crackajack replied
Assassin's Creed Has "Overperformed" This Quarter, Says Ubisoft
Opinion Business Game Dev 
23
783
FoxMcChief replied
Top Bottom