About time
I have always had a place in my heart for Assassins Creed. I feel a certain kind of connection to the story, having spent countless hours collecting, purchasing, and most importantly, stabbing my way through five games. I thought the previous game (Revelation) was a sadly predictable wringing out of the Assassin sponge and was curious, though a bit put off, by AC III.
So, was it any good?
If you want the quick answer, than yes it was. I thoroughly enjoyed slicing my way through a well defined era. Who doesn't want to ride with Paul Revere? (Me, I am Canadian). I am not from the states nor do I live in the US, so the whole thing lost a bit of the awe factor that I sense was meant for US citizens. Nonetheless, It was a well crafted world, the best I think this generation of consoles will be able to pull off, aside from, maybe, GTA V.
The game has an immediately memorable opening sequence in a theater in London, circa 1700s. It is extremely atmospheric and the game opening ends with a great twist. At the same time I seems to take forever to get going, as the pacing is skewed horribly.
Well I found Conners story very enjoyable in Revolutionary America, I thought Desmond's story ran off without a satisfying ending. It was a huge let down to see everything the series has been building to swept away so swiftly you hardly can believe its happening, to quote Clint, even while its happening.
Something that the game failed horribly at was trying to patchwork together a comfortable system of story missions and side activities. We are not talking a crash and burn, but I felt absolutely no draw to complete anything except the story. We are talking about a series veteran who spent a ton of time doing side missions in previous entries. It felt hidden away under a thin veil, and when you just want to play it is hard to dig out. I felt like I missed out on something afterwords, but did not feel compelled to go back and beat everything.
The gameplay is nearly identical with some minor tweaks here and there. I never liked the climbing in AC, I never found it entertaining, aside from the first few hours of the first game. It always felt detached and crooked and I have never enjoyed it. It is essentially the same system here, just a bit tweaked to climb a few trees and some rock faces and climb slightly faster. That being said, climbing up a tree and onto a cliff is pretty cool.
In Ubisoft's attempts to streamline everything I think they have edged away from a key factor to the game. Though I can't really put a name to it. The cities feel better, but less grand, less characterized and much more simple. The economy feels severely dumbed down from Brotherhoods excellence. Everything just lacks that indefinable hook. It feels more simple and nature-like, less unique and memorable. The puzzle feels like it is missing a piece.
Overall, I loved the story with Conner, loved stabbing dudes, loved the setting, loved the game, well, mostly. I hated the ending, disliked the wandering Desmond story, found some monotonousness, some really bad pacing a handful of technical issues like a choppy frame rate in town. This is not the stunning finale to one of my favorite series, it lacked a bang, it lacked character, it ended poorly, but at the same time there is a level of great craftsmanship that cannot be so ignorantly pushed aside.
It IS astounding what they packed into the world, BUT in a shining example it is proof that it takes more than millions of dollars and teams of hundreds of people to give a game that special feeling. I so badly wanted this game to go over the top into one of the greats, but it just can't quite climb the fence. The formula is messed with, and it is still a winning formula, but for a guy who has spent a great deal of time with AC the formula got a bit tiresome, even with a great deal of production value.
