Assassin Creed III Ending.... Spoilers.... Share your opinions...

#101 Posted by NTM (8330 posts) -

I agree, it was a bad ending, then again, I thought the entire campaign was underwhelming. I'm not sure if I want to jump back in and play any more of it. I'm so disappointed.

#102 Posted by Rafaelfc (1779 posts) -

remember Assassins Creed III for what it was supposed to be...

#103 Posted by TurboMan (8193 posts) -

Assassin's Creed III has probably one of the worst endings I have ever seen in any format... What was THAT?

The game gives you a choice and doesn't allow you to choose it.

Connor get's his revenge... and then has a few epilogue missions where he might as well look at the camera and yell out "GOSH GARRLY, I CAN'T WAIT FOR NEXT YEAR'S ASSASSIN'S CREED!"

Desmond dies for no reason. Juno has been activated. Is this supposed to reward me and add closure in any way?

#104 Edited by kerse (2193 posts) -

This could have been a great game, its not the worst I've ever played but its under brotherhood, 2 and revelations for me. The game just felt like a bunch of parts made in different studios just randomly stitched together, each part was pretty fun, I actually had a lot of fun in the frontier. The main problem is just how poorly everything transitions, I can't imagine what this game would be like to a non-american, they don't introduce any characters or events at all, unless you want to sit there and read the database, which doesn't keep track of what you've read and not read very well. The database would just renew all of the ! on stuff I've read already after every load. One of the most disconnected games I've ever played, its not bad, but not great. I would give this a 3/5 if I reviewed it.

I enjoyed Revelations, despite what was said, but this game has me pretty worried about the next iteration. As far as I know this game was made by over a 1000 people right? There's an incredible lack of focus outside of the main story missions, and even in them sometimes. I really hope they either figure out how to get that many people to make a more focused game, or don't have that many people on it.

Also is it just me or is the Assassin's Creed story literally the same story as Mass Effect now?

#105 Posted by K9 (641 posts) -

I enjoyed both Connor and Desmond's endings. AC protagonists always have had character faults that they try to ameliorate over the course of the narrative. Altair was a religious zealot, Ezio was blinded by revenge, and Connor was way too naive about the human condition. I really appreciated the epilogue scene where a physically broken down Connor stands at the shore and sees people cheering for British going away and then looking back and shaking his head in disgust at the sight of a white man standing by his three black slaves. So much for freedom. Connor's personality wasn't as exciting as Ezio or mysterious as Altair, but he did mature as a character and highlighted the gray moral framework within which both Assassins and Templars are operating.

When I finished the game initially I felt that Ubi droppoed the ball on Desmond as it seemed like he was going to be Neo of AC series. But after reflecting a bit, I am glad that he died and he didn't go on to become the savior figure that Minerva suggested he would become by not releasing Juno. Desmond, a savior figure; the guy who went to Abstergo and murdered dozens of Abstergo security guards just because. All those security guards had families you jerk!!!

Desmond was probably following a Utilitarian moral philosophy. Its ok to bring misery to few if it means bringing happiness to many. And he died by that rule too. Killed himself to save billions. At least he was morally consistent.

So now that AC solar flare arc is over, I want AC series to take at least two years break (two in storyline time), let all the characters mature a bit, like a timeskip of sorts. Desmond may be dead but it doesn't mean a virtual Desmond is out of possibility. For the next game I want virtual Desmond to train a young buck and old Connor to train a struggling kid (a slave most likely) take revenge against the racist confederacy. Call it Assassin's Creed Shippuden: the white devil saga.

#106 Posted by Joeybagad0nutz (1493 posts) -

@K9: I feel like Connor was the one who was blinded by revenge than Ezio. At the beginning, yes, Ezio was blinded by rage. But, by the end of the game, he grew outta his phase with revenge and didn't even kill the man who held responsibility for every bad thing that had happen to Ezio. But, Connor through the entire game, that was his only focus. It was Charles Lee. He had to be held back a couple of times by other characters before he fucked shit up. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing Connor revenge story. I'm happy he got his revenge. That was an awesome scene. I'm more upset by the fact that, that was his only motivation. He rarely branch off in the story and show other aspects of his personality (and yes I did play the homestead missions).

#107 Posted by K9 (641 posts) -

@Joeybagad0nutz: If all Connor wanted was revenge against anyone who destroyed his tribe then he would have gone after Washington too. But he spared Washington because Washington's words resonated with his idealism of freedom. It was not until the epilogue when Connor realized that his idealistic vision of the colonies was misplaced. When he turned around and saw the slaves all he could do was:


Connor's story ends in disappointment and a sense of unfairness. In the end neither Connor nor the Templars are happy with the outcome. I really enjoyed that aspect.

#108 Edited by Will1Lucky (412 posts) -

@Joeybagad0nutz said:

@K9: I feel like Connor was the one who was blinded by revenge than Ezio. At the beginning, yes, Ezio was blinded by rage. But, by the end of the game, he grew outta his phase with revenge and didn't even kill the man who held responsibility for every bad thing that had happen to Ezio. But, Connor through the entire game, that was his only focus. It was Charles Lee. He had to be held back a couple of times by other characters before he fucked shit up. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing Connor revenge story. I'm happy he got his revenge. That was an awesome scene. I'm more upset by the fact that, that was his only motivation. He rarely branch off in the story and show other aspects of his personality (and yes I did play the homestead missions).

The Irony is that Charles Lee didn't even burn his village down, Washington did but he completely ignored him and proceeded to chase Charles to the ends of the earth regardless in some insane rage. He got revenge for the sake of...nothing? The only crime Charles had committed on him was to throw him against a tree and strangle him thats not enough to chase him and kill him like that.... Hell I'd argue what the writers did to Lee was stupid, he didn't go downhill in reality til his infamous retreat.

#109 Posted by dOm_CaTz (275 posts) -

best way I could put it is Assassin's Creed going Assassin's Creed on us. seriously every ending has been ambiguous and left way more questions than answers, it's like the ride is fun then when it's time to leave, you leave with a frown=[.

#110 Posted by BisonHero (8414 posts) -

@TheMasterDS said:

If there's a "Worst Ending" GOTY category this year (which I don't think there usually is but hey, whole new slew of award categories this year probably, it could happen) I imagine it'd be very competitive.

It's kind of sad how much I am in agreement with this. Like, wow, developers-of-big-budget-games, do you ever know how to write poor endings to the fairly interesting worlds you've established.

#111 Edited by Tennmuerti (8300 posts) -

I actually really enjoyed Connors story, homestead missions, Haythem's parts, basically all of the in animus stuff a great deal. And the ending as well as the epilogue to me seemed very fitting. Altair was an arrogant prick who learned humility and temperance in the end. Ezio went from a flamboyant playboy not really caring about the brotherhood much to a wise rejuvenator of the entire order. Connor a naive revenge seeking boy gets a healthy dose of ruination and seeing not so good things continue in the end. (also lest we forget Connor's full story and arc is likely not finished yet, simply this chapter of it)

But man that Desmond ending was pure shitshow.

Thankfully pretty much after the second game I saw the train wreck of the real world stuff coming (they were digging too many holes), so for me the in animus stuff has always been more interesting anyway. And I guess I always felt more like I was playing as Desmond's, ancestors rather than playing as Desmond exploring their memories, so the beefy parts of the games felt more "real" to me.

#112 Posted by gkise73 (2 posts) -

I was so into the AC storyline, I never expected the crap ending I saw today. Instead of somewhat giving closure, 2 choices of 2 different endings were offered yet you didn't get to chose what ending you wanted to see. Instead of the more realistic first ending offered, we were treated to some off the wall crap ass ending, where a first civilization being uploaded herself into a big ass living machine just waiting to be unlocked thousands of years later. So Juno needs Desmond (because of his DNA which is a mixture of human and 1st civ) to unlock her from her prison. This is a bullshit ending if I haven't said that already. I was personally hoping to see more of the Adam and Eve 1st civ stuff like I saw in AC2, but this game was poorly executed, I didn't enjoy the lame collectibles and I miss being able to upgrade things. I hated the Manor, so boring and the basement was horribly designed, nothing like AC2. So back to the bullshit ending....Juno being the true villain, i mean at least use something realistic as a villain, something plausible. The 1st civ created 6 different methods to avoid the 12/21/2012 catastrophe. Here is my question: Desmond claimed to have witnessed through a vision of the future from Juno the launch of the Abstergo satellite on Dec 21....but why didn't he see the catastrophe itself? This leads me to believe that 12/21/2012 was a grand manipulation of power by Juno. The grand temple was created to house all 6 solutions but the way the 12/21/2012 would be solved was by the 4 towers Juno spoke of, they actually were finished thousands of years later. We now have to figure out what Juno's role is...does she want revenge for the death of her husband? Is she actually seeking to find a new vessel? "So we forged a new vessel. One that might endure. It proved easy enough to enter. But to leave required something more. Something wrong"- Juno. Lastly as I end my rant, Juno spoke a line that stuck with me..."What once was, shall be again"...and we have known since AC2 that the 1st Civ sought to save their kind, maybe Juno is seeking to revive her species and now that Desmond has unlocked her...well who knows what else Desmond has released in the grand temple.....R.I.P Desmond, great start but your death IMO was manipulated by a image stuck in a prison, Desmond 12/21/2012 IMO would have been a normal day. Maybe Ab would have released that satellite with that piece of eden.....or maybe Desmond actually caused the very thing he sought to prevent.

#113 Posted by fetchfox (1469 posts) -

Goddamn what a shit ending. I just finished it and it feels like I've just ate something only to afterwards find out that it was rotten. For the first time I can say I don't eagerly await the next game, and I've loved the series since the first one. What a let down.

#114 Posted by OneManX (1709 posts) -

I haven't finished... but I had a inkling of where they were going with this game in terms of the Desmond stuff... and I'm glad. There is just no motivation for that part, it's the weakest parts of the AC games, I just don't care for Desmond, the same way I care for the Assassin I'm playing.

The Connor stuff to me is pretty good. It's raising a lot more middle ground between the Templars and the Assassins and who really has the best of the people at heart. I am having fun running around the world, but those moments where I remember, 'Oh Fuck... I have to play as that other character who is not this amazing assassin' I get kinda bummed.

#115 Posted by OneManX (1709 posts) -

@BisonHero said:

@TheMasterDS said:

If there's a "Worst Ending" GOTY category this year (which I don't think there usually is but hey, whole new slew of award categories this year probably, it could happen) I imagine it'd be very competitive.

It's kind of sad how much I am in agreement with this. Like, wow, developers-of-big-budget-games, do you ever know how to write poor endings to the fairly interesting worlds you've established.

It's kinda odd that Gears of War 3 has a better ending that Mass Effect 3 and ACIII (allegedly)

#116 Edited by Mikey2D (254 posts) -

Assassins Creed as a franchise really needs to take a long hard look at itself and decide whats important. I've been confused about the Desmond side of things since AC: Brotherhood. It's got a bit out of hand really. Terrible cliffhanger endings at the end of each game is a trend for the series - and the more they go the worse they seem to become. Obviously some blame falls on the yearly release schedule. I'd rather the series take a break and come back with a bit more of a concise plot say in 2 - 3 years as opposed to each year. Fat chance of that though.

#117 Edited by Roger778 (960 posts) -


I completely agree with what you said. I would classify Assassins Creed 3 as the most disappointing game for me this year. Even though I liked the story, with an early twist that I didn't see coming, I was really upset with the ending. It ended with Desmond dying, and Juno, the first civilization god, allowed to roam free on Earth. I'm still not sure if the world was saved, because of his sacrifice. It was another cliffhanger ending, and I wasn't expecting that to happen.

As for Conner, he was a good hero, but he was not a terrific and charismatic lead character like Ezio was. He was just completely filled with a lust for vengeance for the templars destroying his life. The only things I liked about him was the Homestead missions where he became the leader of that community, the Naval missions where you got to see him be the captain of a ship, and his tense relationship with his old mentor Achilles, who trained him to be an assassin. Those things gave him some much needed development. Also, it took too long for him to be introduced. He doesn't come into the game until Sequence 5. When I first began playing Haytham Kenway, I assumed he would be the lead character. I was wrong about that, though, and I admit that was a mistake.

There's one thing I will admit though, Conner was a truly badass killing machine, and there were a few times when I fought some redcoats, that I managed to not get De-synchronized. That was cool.

Overall, though I was disappointed in the game, and Assassins Creed 2 is still my favorite of the series. I hope the next game will be better.

#118 Posted by Peanut (964 posts) -

The ending was utter fucking nonsense. I maintain that anything and everything happening outside of the animus is awful, but to be honest the stuff going on inside of it isn't much better.

#119 Edited by _Zombie_ (1473 posts) -

Know what I find funny about the ending? They kill off Desmond right when I was starting to like him. ACII and Revelations? Fucking hated him. He was a dull, boring, completely uninteresting character. But come ACIII? I actually started liking him. I didn't groan when I had to do present-day sequences (though the lack of a mini-map and health indicator was a pain in the ass). And then BAM. They kill him.

Way to go, fuckwits.

#120 Posted by Pop (2689 posts) -

Before finishing the game I was thinking,"dudes don't activate the device cause you're gonna release the first civilization and they're gonna fuck shit up!", I gathered that from the emails and from the discussions with Juno, so I wasn't far off, at the end when I saw Minerva I was like "omg! a twist I didn't see happening?" but nope fucking Desmond just releases Juno (like a bitch), I was hoping for a choice to destroy the world or not destroy it, or maybe that the world ending was just a bluff so you would release Juno.

I'm 50% sure Desmond isn't dead cause maybe Minerva rigged the device and maybe Juno isn't at full power and she needs time to charge it up, and you have X amount of days to go into an animus and travel to the first civilization time and see if you can stop Juno but I can be wrong and this is the end of the series..... NOPE!

I for some reason always thought the parts outside the animus were the most interesting because they always had a mystery to them maybe not in the last 3 games but in the first 2 where you didn't know if the world is like present day or is it the future are there cyborgs etc. Then you know it's present day and it loses it's mystery but then you have to find out how the world ends and I was hoping they would come up with something more inspiring than the sun.

#121 Posted by Assassin17 (26 posts) -

true, i did NOT LIKE THE FUKIN ENDING!!! i mean, who thought of "hey, lets kill off Desmond! That'll bring a twist!" that guy was an idiot!

But, i think the one bright side to this can be a new character, an INTERESTING time period to put an assassin in (maybe the first civilization) and then


now i admit, that MIGHT be something cool, or... it might completely fail on us. But, better than that shitty Desmond Kill! i mean SERIOUSLY!!!!

#122 Posted by supercubedude (492 posts) -

Desmond was indoctrinated.

#123 Posted by JoeyRavn (5122 posts) -

Just finished the game. Had to watch the very last scene on YouTube because my game kept crashing right after the vision of Desmond's future.

Yeah. I was hoping for less criptically-presented open-endedness and more resolution. The game is very, very uneven, if you ask me. It starts going up with Haytham, then takes a deep dive with most of Connor's early stuff. With Captain Kidd's quests and, especially, towards Sequence 10 it spikes once again. But Sequence 12 and the ending(s) are pretty lackluster.

#124 Posted by yakov456 (1965 posts) -

I wanted the choice at the end because the choice to let people die would have been mine, but then they wouldn't be able to make another game I suppose.

#125 Edited by SonnyCheebah (37 posts) -

The ending would be worse if they gave you the option to choose. I mean, what would they do? Make a game based on the off-chance that you decided to spare Desmond, you selfish pricks?

#126 Posted by TrashMustache (559 posts) -

they've been milking the game forever and now all of a sudden you're like omg the story sucks? the story sucked since they were unable to deal with their clusterfuck of a plot at the end of AC2 (which i thought was amazing but in all honesty just not solveable)

#127 Posted by ink (18 posts) -

It's Lost, in video game format. The publisher wants to make another Assassin's Creed game next year, and so they cowardly hide behind implausible bullshit. I loved the series, and even put up with Revelations, but I'm done. The writers have no balls. Conner could have been such a great character, but they squandered it in a Quixotic yearly franchise quest.

So much wasted potential. It makes me sad.

#128 Posted by Seb (385 posts) -


#129 Posted by morrelloman (634 posts) -

I hated the ending. This and Revelations have soured my on the series. I played both this and Liberation, but did NO SIDE work at all. In the first three I did everything. I just think that after 3 games a lot of series begin to lose their luster and the desire to push the games forward (both technically AND/OR with meaningful narrative) is hindered by the NEED to maximize $. I do not know how they can fix this. I really hope they take a year off at some point to help give one of the iterations a bit of a boost.

#130 Posted by blueinferno (480 posts) -

I'm just pissed. I just beat the game about an hour ago and I'm just....pissed. I just feel like everything that's happened to this point in the series has become irrelevant because of this lackluster ending. Desmond just keels over and dies and BOOM credits roll. What the hell?

#131 Posted by lucaskane37 (5 posts) -

Of course will have another assassins creed to reveal what happens after all this, and it's much probable that will continue being with Connor, cause in the epilogue shows Connor realizing that the freedom was only for whites, and that the freedom he fought so hard, he had not yet achieved, so is probable that the next AC will be he fighting for this. And about Desmond, everything makes we think that Desmond died but I think that maybe in the next AC everyone will think that he died, but Desmond will be live on earth, I don't know how, but have this possibility. But if not, William Miles (Desmond's Father) have the same ancestors.

#132 Posted by MrCandleguy (914 posts) -

Ending was god damn awful.

But... i liked Connor..

#133 Edited by slugs (2 posts) -

Just finished the game and I have to say the game did a fine job of making me think the Assassins are a bunch of nihilistic, selfish pricks. Where as Ezio's tale lead me to feel like I was part of a cause, Connor's made me feel like a dope. This would have all been OK, and I welcome that morally grey area, except that Desmond's story did nothing to resolve that. He just threw a tantrum at Abstergo HQ and killed emotionlessly. Yay. The final scene had no drama or tension. It just happened and then it was over. The Templars should have been closing in, the apocalypse clouds looming. Desmond should've been tweaking in and out of all the lives he lived. ANYTHING. There was no sense of style. I didn't even get to visit the modern day Homestead and dig up the key myself. How cool would that have been if it was a gas station or a mini mart or even a ruin. They rushed the ending. They failed to deliver on the momentous death of Vidic or explain Daniel Cross to players unfamiliar with his importance. They just failed. At least Connor's pyrrhic victory rang true but how could they not deliver on the Desmond storyline after 5 main games that centered on him? Incidentally, I did enjoy the game. Especially the naval battles and the homestead building/hunting. Peg Leg missions were also a lot of fun.

Edit: I just had a thought. What if Desmond had entered the eye as a "program" and had saved the world with the aurora tower thing but then... had a final battle with Juno that ran through all the set pieces of the series so far in which he assumed each of the different characters through the battle? It could even be one of the classic AC mind puzzles and not just a fight. She would still try to reason with him and he would once and for all choose freedom over her tyranny. Desmond would defeat her and save humanity closing the series... sigh. It would even have been cool if he used the blade instead of his hand and destroyed the eye, doomed the world but also killed the first civ for good.

Edit 2: I also hated his father. This could have been called Assassins Creed: Fathers and Sons if not for the total blackhole that was the Desmond/Miles relationship. Another reason the kidnapping didn't work for me.

#134 Edited by haggis (1674 posts) -

Just finished the end a bit ago. I wasn't too surprised by the parallels they were trying to draw between the conflict between the Templars and Assassins and the internal conflicts within the first race. In fact, I kinda liked the thematic elements. But Desmond touches the sphere and ... well, that's pretty much it. I'm divided over whether Desmond is dead, or if he's simply been uploaded like Minerva, et al., to some computer. Very little character closure.

I'm more irritated with the length, which was virtually nonexistent--especially in comparison to the long, drawn-out, and boring cut scenes that came in the last two memory sequences. I expected at least a little more than a voice-over during the credits and a few seconds of cutscene setting up more sequels.

I hoped for some Connor details in the epilogue, and instead we got one mission that's running back and forth, and then some two second "missions" that mostly require going to a waypoint and standing around. Connor was so flat and dull. No love interest, no depth, no conflict. He gets a few good scenes (well, one--with Hatham and Washington) and then nothing.

For the most part I think the ending themes were fine, much like the Mass Effect 3 ending. I didn't have a problem with where they went, but I'm left wondering why things weren't fleshed out more. There is some setup for the argument in the final scene if you go and read the emails that sporadically pop up, but there's no reason why some of this conflict couldn't have been hashed out a bit in the actual game. Previous games in the series did this.

Everything in this game is so disjointed. Still, I can't say I didn't have a good time playing it. It could have been a lot better.

#135 Posted by PridedWalnut (11 posts) -

it was kind of like mass effect except I don't give no shits about Desmond. He was only really about at the start of game tutorial and some dialogue in the animus. And his GODDAM FACE KEPT CHANGING. I wish you had been able to get a little bit of choice in. As the final cut scene was going, i was weighing up the two choices then the game decides for me... thanks Assassins creed... I'll still get AC4 but only cause by this point I've invested to much time not to

#136 Posted by Kermity (78 posts) -

Boy, the Desmond story and pretty much the whole game had a very strong stink of 'time crunch'. I've been waiting for years to see how the modern end of the world arc will conclude in AC3, and it was over so quickly and so anticlimactically. I like to think that the project team had a very different idea of how it should end when they were originally working on AC2.

Also, I found it funny that the whole Templar EYE sattelite that they've been hinting at, since the first game I think, was so easily dismissed towards the end. Just another thing that feels like given the time, they would have flushed out much more.

#137 Posted by DrMcKittrick (264 posts) -

Just finished. I thought Conner was the best assassin we had. Sure Ezio seemed to fight more for a cause but there were three games to explain it. I'm sure we all knew Connor wasn't only going to get one game. As far as Desomond is concerned I dont think we'll see the last of him, but he is a weak character. Having played and finished all the games, I loved ACIII the best.

#138 Posted by Kierkegaard (660 posts) -

@DrMcKittrick said:

Just finished. I thought Conner was the best assassin we had. Sure Ezio seemed to fight more for a cause but there were three games to explain it. I'm sure we all knew Connor wasn't only going to get one game. As far as Desomond is concerned I dont think we'll see the last of him, but he is a weak character. Having played and finished all the games, I loved ACIII the best.

Yay! Someone else who liked it.... Asssassin's Creed is the bravest goddamn game series in a long, long time. You play as a Muslim dude killing knights in the holy land, an Italian dude killing corrupt Catholics (and chilling with people of all cultures in Istanbul), and a conflicted Kanien'kehaka (or something close to that) dude figuring out how to protect himself, his people, and his ideals when all the white mother fuckers just want his land and his killing arm. Desmond goes from a slacker bartender to a creepy killer/ enslaver of the world.

Does it have crappy moments? Yeah. Does it waste some potential? Yeah. But what is there is storytelling that deals directly with race, religion, murder, colonialism, sexism and more heady, important issues in often the most mature fashion seen in any media. There's a completely small but great mission where you talk to Miriam, a hard ass hunter lady, about how she won't become a useless, powerless housewife after marriage. It's a great goddamn series purely for this bravery and willingness to confront players about history and what it could mean.

None of that would mean shit if the game were bad, but it is not. The stealth is still fun. The naval missions, frontier, homestead creation, and revolutionary war fighting (load those muskets) at times approach real wonder. Desmond's treks into the world are disturbing and difficult without the animus cheats (both of awareness and morality), as they should be.

Game players often lambast boring games or expected games, but when something truly revolutionary in its storytelling and utter respect for the player's intelligence comes around, we look for holes. There are holes. They don't matter. Assassin's Creed 3 is a great game.

#139 Posted by face15 (1368 posts) -


#140 Posted by Rotten_Avocado (84 posts) -

Super rushed ending. Sucked big huge balls. I played 30+ hours of AC3 forcing myself to like it. Every once in a while, I would come upon a speck of a moment where something was tasty, but the rest was a rotting puss-filled carcass of a serious I had really loved.
And the ending? Seriously? How can you do that crap?
I can't believe the ending was 2 mins long ( I know it was longer ) and the credits were 15+ !!!!
I want my life back!!!!!

#141 Posted by Rotten_Avocado (84 posts) -

Desmond dying didn't suck that bad. It's the way it happened.
They should have had him struggle or something. Instead he took it like a complete wuss.
He already sucked as a character, but they (ubisoft) decided to flush all of our time down a toilet full of diarrhea.
POOP!!! Poop I say!!

#142 Posted by KittyVonDoom (447 posts) -

These games never end, they just set-up the next one rather than having any logical conclusion to the thing you just played. There's a pretty good chance it won't even have much effect on the next AC game.

#143 Posted by natetodamax (19421 posts) -

I thought it was garbage.

#144 Posted by FilipHolm (688 posts) -

Maybe if they'd took some goddamn time and actually explain what the fuck is going on it'd be a different story. But as it is right now, the ending was the most rushed storytelling I've ever experienced.

Oh hey Lee Got away, oh wait, now we're in the house he fled to. Hey we killed him (pretty cool scene), wait now we're in the village? His people are gone, when did that happen... Man Connor might bleed to death... 6 months later: ok so he survived or.... oh it's over? alright.

#145 Edited by Venatio (4654 posts) -

Just finished it after 32 hours with 82 % synched, ending just made me dissapointed, I loved Connors story, all the side missions were enjoyable. The Homestead stuff was great, naval missions were fun and the trinket islands were great but his ending felt painfully rushed and so so anticlimatic, but that pales in comparison to what they did to Desmond, 5 games of buildup and they end with that none choice bullshit? So bummed...but not surprised
I actually liked Desmond, felt like he deserved more

#146 Posted by Shaanyboi (1414 posts) -

That ending was dogshit. On both the Connor front and the Desmond front.

The final chase was a buggy mess. I thought people were exaggerating, but no, it's SO bad. The final cutscene between Connor and Charles Lee, however was a very human, very effective farewell, and suddenly I was like "well... okay. Sure." But as a gameplay finale for Connor? It was really unsatisfying.

The Desmond finale, though, was a hot mess all around. It felt like that storyline particularly was just so poorly paced. They add that Church guy seemingly out of nowhere (I assume he's from previous fiction in the series, but fuck that, I don't care), but then do nothing with him as far as creating a foil between him and Desmond. But then it all just ends on this shitty cutscene? Fucking hell... THAT'S what we've been training Desmond for?

The smart thing to have done would be to draw parallels between Desmond and Connor's fathers. Draw parallels between those relationships. They could've closed the Haythem/Connor story better, but if they approached it differently, they could've reflected that between Desmond and his own dad. Then, the final mission would be to simultaneously save his father, and beat Abstergo. Whether it be chasing them to a cave, keeping them from using the Apple or something, whatever. But the final section you play should be the ultimate 'Desmond is a total fucking badass' section. This is what you've been building towards. This is what you've earned.

But instead, they chose to just kind of end on this flaccid final moment to facilitate them to continue making sequels, rather than closing off this this story. Fuck it all. I liked the game overall, but that final 20 minutes pissed me right the fuck off. Most Disappointing of 2012 indeed.

#147 Edited by MasterChiefSnake (27 posts) -

I've passed this game and this ending is sucks much like in original Mass Effect 3's ending. This is why I called it "Assassin's Effect 3". Also in past before back to near the final scene in present, Conner killed the last member of Templar is so stupid when the last Templar ask Connor to kill the last Templar just like playing hunter and hunted game where you hide and get caught by hunter. Then you sacrifice yourself then you told hunter to "Kill me." Please Ubisoft. Make another Assassin's Creed sequel. You can't just quit now.

#148 Posted by OldSnake (17 posts) -

It was a cop out....I hate the fact that the whole purpose of the Assassin order was undermined by the ending....just felt like the series compromised itself when it felt the need to go with such a drastic "twist"

#149 Posted by fergal_hayes (2 posts) -

I would have liked the series more if they just left out the 1st civilisation mumbo jumbo from the get go. Assassins v Templars, and centralise the plot on the Templars just trying to take over the world or something.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.