‘Assassin’s Creed 3′ review: An alternate history, with footnotes

Oct. 30, 2012 | 9:00 a.m.

Long before “Assassin’s Creed 3” gets going – multiple hours before players even meet the part-Native American protagonist Connor – players have the opportunity to play a board game. Fanorama, as “Assassin’s Creed” informs players, is an ancient game native to Madagascar.  In Ubisoft’s historical fiction series, it’s played on a ship sailing the Atlantic to the American colonies.

While Fanorama is a great example of what this game does best — pay attention to historical detail — it also highlights an aspect of the game that’s ultimately lacking. In the wide-screen “Assassin’s Creed 3″ world, this  interactive board game is one of the few places players can strategize outside the confines of an otherwise convoluted, rigid plot.

Playing through “Assassin’s Creed 3″ is like flipping through the pages of a screenplay. Forget puzzles, there are directions. Mount the horse, the game tells you, that’s in front of you, or create a path, the game orders, by shooting the barrels to your left. Whether such mission-based hand-holding is a pro or a con will likely depend on one’s appreciation of the game’s reality-based universe.

PHOTOS: Scenes from ‘Assassin’s Creed 3′

To its credit, “Assassins Creed 3” does not skimp on details.

Set largely in the period during the American Revolution, “Assassins Creed 3” (Xbox 360, PS3, PC) is an action-adventure at its most expertly researched, and it is the all-too-rare title to prominently explore Native American culture. Colonial cities such as Boston are constructed via 18th century maps, and Ubisoft hired a Mohawk community consultant for language accuracy. It’s perhaps the only game released in 2012 that could be more fun to experience as a historical fact-checker than a player.

The Battle of Bunker Hill, as re-imagined by “Assassin’s Creed 3.” (Ubisoft).

For instance, when players are tasked with eliminating a target, it’s during a performance of John Gay’s “The Beggar’s Opera,” complete with actual music and dialogue from the latter. But the opera  isn’t identified by name. Instead, the early 1700s satire is simply performed in the background as players scale the balconies and backstage areas of the theater. Stop and enjoy the show if you like, or simply carry on with the assassination at hand.

Unlike prior iterations that were set during the Third Crusade and the Italian Renaissance, “Assassin’s Creed 3” is an exploration of the American frontier. While the setting is the game’s main strength, it ultimately underscores some of the title’s failings. Without the more ancient religious backdrop of the previous titles, “Assassin’s Creed” swaps some of its fantastical mystique for a look at the birth of America, and the drama of the latter simply can’t be topped.

MORE: ‘Assassin’s Creed 3′ writer Corey May adds revolutionary details

Much of the first half of “Assassin’s Creed 3” is played from the point of view of Haytham Kenway, a British warrior of questionable allegiance who is the father of the game’s half-Mohawk, half-British hero, Connor. It should be noted that moving as Haytham or Connor is seamless, and “Assassin’s Creed 3” rewards the uncoordinated with fluid gameplay that makes it a cinch to scale Boston chapels and towering forests.

Sneaking around Boston in “Assassin’s Creed 3.” (Ubisoft)

While one can wander colonial America, missions are largely of the Point-A-to-Point-B variety. There’s more map traversing than problem solving, and when one needs to find a key or fix a boat, the game points the way and everything is solved with the simple press of a button. One is free to roam, but unlike say, the recently-released stealth game “ Dishonored,” “Assassin’s Creed 3” sticks closely to the script.

Real-life people and historical events get roped into the “Assassin’s Creed” story line. Players meet Benjamin Franklin and are asked to hunt down the misplaced pages of his almanac, and revolutionary events such as the Boston Tea Party figure into the game. It’s most fun to play “Assassin’s Creed 3” with a laptop or tablet nearby in order to easily research the backgrounds of figures such as Sir William Johnson when they make a cameo.

History, however, ultimately trumps the fictional “Assassin’s Creed 3” world. By this point in the franchise the story line is well-established — and it’s a mess.

The game opens in 2012, and like most pop-art that references the impending Dec. 21, 2012, doomsday, “Assassin’s Creed 3” soon descends into layer upon layer of historical hokum. There’s an ongoing war between the Knights Templar and the Assassin Order, and to further confuse matters there’s feuding gods. Players, ultimately, are channeling the assassin ancestors of the present-day Desmond Miles.

But it’s less of a plot and more of an excuse to simply explore true-life people and events without the risk of being politically incorrect. The game even opens with the disclaimer that it was developed by a “multicultural team of various religious faiths and beliefs.” The young Connor watches colonial forces destroy his tribe, but there’s the end-of-the-world/Knights Templar business to explore rather than the more complicated aspects of American history.

At war in colonial Boston in “Assassin’s Creed 3.” (Ubisoft)

Having only had the game since Friday afternoon and having not yet completed it (YouTube videos will spoil the ending, for those who want to skip ahead), I found the melding of the Revolutionary War with “National Treasure”-like plot to be distracting. The Ubisoft team has done an exceptional job reconstructing colonial America and this game makes it clear that there’s plenty of rich Native American gaming story lines yet to create.

As an added treat, each new setting in “Assassin’s Creed 3” even comes with its own historical footnotes, telling gamers about past wars, the Sons of Liberty, flattened hillsides and what became of forgotten landmarks. But contrasting with all the history was the sense that each mission started to feel like errand upon errand for a needlessly complex conspiracy theory – escort him, hunt this, find that — and the nagging reality that the facts are more fascinating, more messy than the game’s fantasy. In fact, the absurdity of the game’s plot would be less apparent if the game wasn’t so real in so many other aspects.

For those who have watched a “National Treasure” film and thought, ‘This would be more fun to play,’ “Assassin’s Creed 3” proves overwhelmingly so that it is. Yet around hour 15 of this 40-plus hour single-player campaign, I simply longed for another round of Fanorama. What a simple joy it was to play an actual historical game without the care of hitting the next high-concept plot point.

– Todd Martens

RECENT AND RELATED

How ‘Wreck-It Ralph’ infiltrated the game industry

‘AC3′ writer Corey May adds revolutionary details

Review face-off: ‘Dance Central 3′ vs. ‘Just Dance 4′

Will Nintendo’s GamePad reinvent the playing field?

Review: ‘Dishonored’ is only as violent as you make it

‘Borderlands 2’ survives on Pandora with humor

IndieCade 2012: Five games worth noticing

‘Warfighter’ score brings composer full circle

‘XCOM: Enemy Unknown’ meshes past, present

For composers, video games are land of opportunity

Comments


49 Responses to ‘Assassin’s Creed 3′ review: An alternate history, with footnotes

  1. Luke Kiley says:

    Why does everyone hate on Desmond? I don't find it confusing at all and at the end of Assassin's Creed II, I realized I loved it. It's interesting to me and it makes since. All of the historical periods the game takes place in, are part of the overall backdrop of the Assassins Vs. Templars and Desmond is showing players how the Assassin/Templar War is going in their time. I hope Desmond gets some action this time around!

    • andrew says:

      This definitely. But where the precursors are concerned theres gonna be some dislike. Personally their outfits are ridiculous.

  2. Gamer061 says:

    I wish AC would drop the whole Animus/Desmond thing. It's distracting and incredibly convoluted, not to mention a whole lot less fun to play through those sequences. AC would be a fantastic series if it were just a set of disconnected assassin games set throughout history without this ridiculous and unnecessary over-arching storyline.

    • chris says:

      desmond is what keeps them connected, they are his ancestors. He also shows the current 21st century view of the assassin templar war

    • Gaucho420 says:

      I fully agree. The SyFy, Ancient Aliens business is ridiculous. I wish the game was just set in its historic times.

    • SirenDrake says:

      In part, I agree with you. I didn't like the whole business with the aliens, and playing as Desmond just isn't as much fun, but those things are a small part of the games so far. Even with those things, the Assassin's Creed series *is* a fun series of games, and in part *because* of the modern scenes and overall story arc. The introduction of the Animus and reliving ancestor memories is uniquely imaginative and a great way of explaining a lot of game mechanics, e.g. replacing character death with desynchronization as an explanation for why your character never really dies and the need to synchronize ancestor memories as the explanation for why events can be replayed repeatedly and replayed out of order. In short, the modern scenes and alien story aren't what bring me back to the series, but they weren't enough of an annoyance to mar my enjoyment of the rest of the games.

    • steven says:

      I agree. I thought the Animus thing was retarded.

      • andrew says:

        I have to disagree. I dont find the story convoluted at all and while the modern story was originally supposed to be a framework and no more its been handled not particularly badly in comparison to others ive seen. I wont deny there is some amount of absurdity but the origins of the world is a subject that no matter how you look at it few people are really gonna believe. At least here they played it safe by effectively confirming both evolution and creationism.

  3. Steve says:

    This is purely opinionated. If you do not like the game then don't play it. Obviously this Todd Martens never played the previous Assassin's Creed games. Because if he had, then he would have known what to expect. Every AC game has the same gameplay, and if you didn't love the first one then you will not love the others. Yes, the game does not allow the player to deviate from the plot much, but that is to be expected since every AC game does this. Also, MOST games do this, including Halo and Call of Duty games for instance. These games may not always map out your every move but they pretty much do! Shoot this, shoot that, hide here, run here, etc etc.

    • Milkman says:

      Whoa. An opinionated article you say? Shame on this writer for having an "opinion". Cause it's not like that's the whole point of a review, right?

    • Dude says:

      Sorry Steve… I've played and loved the past AC games but about 3 hours into this game and I am not fond of it. Too many changes in gameplay and I personally have hit too many glitches/snags in the game that is making it a lot more frustrating than fun. I love AC, but this game "SO FAR" is highly over rated to me.

    • THROW13DUCES777 says:

      I effing hated the first one i liked it for the first five minutes then it was some major BS Second one was the one tht drew me in

  4. Anatole says:

    Did you get past the 6th mission/part yet?

    My understanding is those are mainly the training missions, and the game opens up considerably after that.

    Also the Beggar's Opera is identified in the in game menu, where it gives more background info.

  5. Ezio 2.0 says:

    Nice writeup.

    I've played all 4 previous Assassin's Creed titles, and the trailers for AC3 lead me to believe the same attention to detail has been lavished on the current incarnation…

    …but the article hits the peg on the head for me when it states "Without the more ancient religious backdrop of the previous titles, 'Assassin’s Creed' swaps some of its fantastical mystique for a look at the birth of America…"

    …which just isn't as intriguing, IMO. In other words, I'm just not as interested in inhabiting this historical period as an assassin for 40-something hours.

    The animus doesn't beckon on AC3.

  6. Tony says:

    I hate reading reviews like these. Horrible article, I wish people would stop hating and take the game as it is. The history portion of the game is Desmond’s ancestors and he’s trying to unlock clues to the past. Watch and listen to what the game is talking about and maybe people would understand. One of the best games when it comes to story telling love the gameplay as well.

    • theEman0924 says:

      well said…the game was amazing and people actually need to listen to the story being told…it all makes sense and it all adds up!

      • andrew says:

        Agreed. A good review isnt just an opinion but this one seems to be just that and nothing more. Common mistake. Reviews really have a lot more to say.

  7. @undefined says:

    This is bang on the money and exactly how I felt about the first three titles. I found myself doing background research into notable figures of the crusades and renaissance periods because they're so much more interesting than the plot the game tries (and fails) to fashion. Ditch the Animus malarky it's just so weak…

  8. Dan says:

    Horrible article.

  9. chris says:

    People complain about the story being too complicated. You must either not pay attention or you are a 10 year old child. If you play from AC 1 all the way to AC 3 (playing Brotherhood and Revelations too) you should have no problem understanding the story.

    • @undefined says:

      You just said it took 5 earlier games to make this story easy to understand. That's one of the reasons it's complicated. The developers are wasting resources developing the time traveling nonsense when they could just focus on assassins from various eras.

      • Sean says:

        You see. this is the issue. People don't pay attention to the plot of the game. The templars are evil. The assassins are the good guys. The game is based upon finding the Pieces of Eden to stop the templars. The templars are trying to get the pieces so that they can destroy the world. And as the Desmond reveal trailer/opening cut scene shows, the world will end if Desmond doesn't succeed in stopping the templars. Hence going back in time trying to find the pieces and where they were hidden so they know where to look in the present to stop the templars. people need to stop complaining about it being "artificial," "nonsense," and "a waste of time," and realize that the series is much bigger than the ancestors.

  10. Khan says:

    Reviewers had 4 nights to play one of the biggest blockbusters our generation and still hasn’t completed it? I find it hard to believe reviewing games is his full time job. Also for me; Desmond parts from the end of AC 1 are awesome.

  11. Braden says:

    My biggest concern/complaint going into the game (only a few hours in) has been the American Revolution setting, but it occurs to me that there isn't really any other logical step. From where I'm standing, the fact is that the public at large would likely hold Ubisoft on trial for any other avenues- going back in the timeline or re-using the same era would make fans feel patronized and ripped off, as it well should. I wholeheartedly agree that a lot of the mystique present in previous titles isn't there- and really can't be. The timeframe has gotten to be a little too close to modern day, and it's certainly a topic most Americans are more familiar with than the renaissance.

    All that said though, this review paints a rather piss-poor picture; based upon the whole tone of the thing though, I'll assume that was the author's intention and that it was decided long before playing that he didn't like the game. The lack of any substance comparing this installment to its predecessors also immediately makes me question the author's familiarity with the series overall. "… and to further confuse matters theres's feuding gods." actually just about sums up my thoughts on the effort made into getting any of the backstory here.

    "What a simple joy it was to play an actual historical game without the care of hitting the next high-concept plot point." My recommendation is to review PopCap games then. Or go play Tetris. Because to be completely honest- somebody lied if they said half the draw to the series *isn't* the complex plot. Every game has shortcomings- if one didn't, then the industry would completely collapse. Theres no question this game will be a big one in the declining months of 2012, but it just isn't done justice here when it's completely removed from context and placed against a background of pollitically correct or incorrectness.

  12. Alex says:

    As far as plot, I can see how sometimes it can seem a little complex and convoluted, but I think that games like COD and HALO have kind of spoiled people into expecting a simple, straightforward storyline that is spoon-fed to you. The brilliance of Assassin's Creed is that it is based on reality.Granted, there have been liberties taken, but that's the point, isn't it? The general audiences knowledge of history typically doesn't extend beyond a few half-remembered high school classes that you probably caught up on sleep during. But the fact of the matter is that we really don't know exactly what went on 300 or 500 or 800 years ago. There is so much that we accept blindly is incontrovertible truth that whenever someone challenges it, we automatically reject it, because we think we know exactly what is going on. But we don't. AC has found those numerous grey areas in history and has filled them in with their own vein of fiction. And those grey areas are not always so straight-forward, like for example a COD game. It really does require you to have some intellectual curiosity, and check up on what was actually going on. If you haven't been inspired to do so by the other games, then AC3 will probably be too much effort for you. And if you need any further proof as to how much leeway there really is in the interpretation of history, then look at the thousands, if not millions, of every conspiracy theory that has sprung up in the last century. Granted, these are mainly the products of over-active imagination, but the fact that they can happen at all proves that not every fact has been accounted for in history. One of my favorite parts of the game's story in the previous games was the whole glyph section, because it showed you how different history might actually be from what we know, and that is the primary allure for me.

    Gameplay: Yes, he is right in the fact that the fetch, follow, and kill missions are a little trite, but the game does something at the end that really makes it the reason why it has so much value. Its puts you back at the end. You can do whatever you f-ing want. And to me, that is where really your imagination is the limit. You assign your objectives. If you want to kill a certain guard, go ahead. You can just go up to him and slaughter him, you can lure him away and strike in the shadows, you can have him inexplicably start flailing around, hang him with your rope dart, smoke bomb him and have him magically appear dead, steal his body and throw at people from the rooftop. In revelations, I had so much fun tormenting people with bombs, because they increased the variety and the imagination you can inject into the gameplay exponentially. I'm still finding different mechanics that I haven't seen before. The storyline quests can be boring, but the real limit is just how creative you can get with what you have when there is no Revere or Adams or Suleiman or Machiavelli giving you orders. For me, that is where the games become like Dishonored, and you have the possibility to do what you want. Climbing on rocks: if youve ever climbed a rock than you know you can just climb whatever you please, there is a path you have to scope out. Its the same in AC3, which is honestly terrific for me. Because being able to scale any building kind of irritated me in previous installments. This way, it is slightly more real.
    Desmond: I didn't mind him, though he wasn't the greatest character. But there needed to be more action with him. We spent 5 games building him up for a few buildings to climb, essentially. These missions were cool, but there needed to be more for him. But he doesn't matter, you play the game for Connor, and i think this review, despite having a few cogent points, was over-critical, and didn't play with enough imagination.

    • Jamie says:

      Yes I totally agree with the above comment the article / review if you can even call it that was very cynical and was mainly voiced by the writers own opinion

  13. Dustin says:

    How do you play the DLC missions

  14. Johnn D says:

    Good info on the game, but…..how can a review be written if the game hasn't been completed yet?

  15. Thomason says:

    Assassin's Creed has always been a more promising franchise, but this games full of glitches. Also it only has the illusion of freedom. Red Dead Redemption is a few years younger, and in my opinion and much more sophisticated and fulfilling open world game.

  16. Erik says:

    A simplistic review from a simplistic gamer who must spend more time playing farmville than delving into the subtle history and conspiratorial elements of Assassin's Creed.

    Assassin's Creed's multilayered plot is no more complex than the mythologies of franchises like Elder Scrolls, Halo or Mass Effect and is, in many cases much more believable.

    The plot is quite simple. For the past millennia, two secret organizations (Templars and Assassins) have been waging a war for the minds and hearts of the masses. The Templars believe that Utopia is achieved through ordered control while the Assassins promote freedom of thought and expression. Both organizations have infiltrated political entities to achieve their goals. The center piece of this war are the pieces of Eden, ancient technology left behind by those who came before that can control humans everywhere via a genetic hook. The templars and Assassin's created the Animus to discover the location of these artifacts. At the same time, The Ones who Came Before have used the Animus to communicate across the centuries with Desmond, warning him of an impending Apocalypse that threatens to wipe out humanity. Simple. Easy. No "warring gods."

  17. Rogal says:

    it saddens me that people do not like the setting of the game. i have been waiting for anAmerican revolution game since i can remember. the time period fascinates me, the characters, the brilliance, the ignorance, the advancements in tech, the unbalance of tech. though i understand people are entitled to thei opinion, it saddens me that with sch a response to the setting i will not see many more of games in my favored setting.

    • Derek says:

      I totally agree. I am a huge fan of Ezio and the AC2 games… but I am very much enjoying this new setting. They brought something new to the table while staying true to the feel of past games. People are griping over ridiculous things because they don't understand or don't enjoy these type of games. I'm loving this game so far and it is awesome to "stand" next to George Washington for once.

    • randomcat says:

      play the history channel games. They use real history not some made up world. And the games are not broken when the ship them

  18. Jon says:

    "But it’s less of a plot and more of an excuse to simply explore true-life people and events without the risk of being politically incorrect. The game even opens with the disclaimer that it was developed by a “multicultural team of various religious faiths and beliefs.”"

    Have you even played any of the other ones? They all say that.

  19. nosferotica says:

    "gamers" like "gamero" are probably why games progress downward into a steaming pile of crap. They gripe for changes that are unfortunately made, while those of whom appreciate the games for what they are keep their mouths shut and enjoy…

    And we end up with crap games because their attention span is far too short to appreciate a decent storyline.

  20. SirenDrake says:

    I find it interesting that no one has noted the reason for the linear storyline. In the Assassin's Creed series, you are not deciding the story through your character choices, you are experiencing events that have already occurred. That is why you desynchronize when you kill too many citizens: because your Animus interpretation of your ancestor's memories departed too far from what actually happened.

    As for the lack of puzzles, the puzzles in Assassin's Creed are just of a different kind, i.e. how do I make my way across a fortress through a dozen patrolling, hostile guards without alerting any of them? In some games, figuring out how to do combat effectively *is* the puzzle. But the fact that so much time in the AC series is dedicated to tasks such as collecting flags and feathers hidden in nooks and crannies of the game world proves that exploration is the true focus of these games, which is fine by me because I do enjoy pure puzzle games, but I also enjoy simply exploring lush, detailed game worlds.

    I loaded up Assassin's Creed III just to make sure it would run but quit before completing the introductory sequences, so I can't say much about it yet, but I have played all the way through AC, ACII, and more than halfway through AC: Brotherhood, and I think Ubisoft deserves some credit for designing a game series with such a linear storyline in such a way that a player has as much freedom of exploration as they do.

    I had a blast roaming about in Levant during the Crusades and in Renaissance Italy. I honestly don't expect to have as much fun in Colonial America because it lacks the romance and except for the natural landscapes isn't likely to be as beautiful, but I plan to give it a fair try (once I've completed Brotherhood and Revelations) before I decide against it.

  21. Connor says:

    For those complaining about the animus part and only liking the history aspect, is only a fan of the game in the sense you like going through history, and like killing things and scaling buildings. However this is only half of the game. Assassins creed is built on conspiracy, the whole game revolves around a secret fictional war. You may not like the syfy stuff, but that’s just saying you don’t like the assassins creed universe. For those of us that enjoy the little twists and turns that ubisoft gave us while they tell this interesting story, the Desmond and animus is the meat of this game. The extra is all the history. It’s a game that takes place over many timelines, past present and future. And they are all connected. It’s awesome.

  22. Chris says:

    This review exemplifies the right to have your own opinion because I completely disagree with any negatives posted here. He didn't even motion towards the naval warfare component which is glorious in every way, and challenging as well, and challenging is what the game is. The game in its entirety is amazing because it does what I feel only few games achieve and that's capture my attention. Starting from AC and spanning to AC2, Brotherhood, Revelations, and finally AC3, I found myself fully enthralled in every game's arching story line. Like any game, there are problems with mechanics, game play etc. but to me, the Assassin's Creed games hit every need I could find, even the ones I didn't know I had.

  23. Suisyo says:

    I think you’d be hard pressed to name many games that were not laden with directions. Of course some more than others but most games, especially major titles will have cues or directions on how to proceed through or accomplish an objective. Without it you might end up wandering aimlessly for God knows how long in frustration. If linear is not your cup of tea, then it would be best to try an open world RPG like say, Skyrim. The AC series is not this, although its creators have done very well to expand the playable spaces to give a more open feel and experience. But as SirenDrake pointed out you are following the past of your ancestors, and to deviate too far from that past will cause you to desynchronize, since you would be essentially altering history. As such there are guidelines set up. But as you may or may not have noticed, not every guideline is mandatory. Many are optional and a way to strive for 100% synchronization. So if you don’t want to follow their direction to complete mission without killing any guards you don’t have to. As for those which are mandatory, well I’m certain those are set up to be challenges for players. Aside from the extensive glitches I’ve experienced, I believe this game has a lot to offer and in a point of history rarely portrayed in gaming. It is fresh and new in that aspect and the naval battles are not only user friendly but a ton of fun. So can be tracking and killing game and strategizing on some of the difficult areas you must infiltrate. Maybe play more of the game or play previous ones as well to increase appreciation. As an ongoing series not having played previous titles can make it confusing. If you have played the previous ones, them I’m not sure how you are confused.

  24. Someotherguy says:

    First – setting in the American revolution?
    Second – Loved the beginning playing has Haytham, who was much more interesting and a believable character. After the Haytham segment, disappointing.
    Third – The game characters are boring. I didn't care about any of it. Gone was the bit of humor, bravisimo and likeability of Ezio. Now we have naive, angry, depressed and disjointed "Connor".

    Desmond's father – an asshole who I wished the Templars killed off. Desmond walks around "thug style" now, as do most of the characters; hunched over. The environment looks nice but close up just as horrible; flat pixilated and uninteresting. The supporting cast of characters, now 1 dimensional scripted support. The feathers, chests, look out sync all normal but the side games of "crafting"? Really? The control changes are simply stupid to anyone who played the previous games. Everyone raving over the movements and controls – ya'll must be smoking way too much weed because it's WORSE than the previous games and even in those, it was marginal at best. The one bright spot I did like was the naval battles though rudimentary in what you can do, was good. The entire Desmond story backdrop – someone should be fired over screwing that up. The long elaborate cut scenes with the the boring description of the machine and history.. couldn't care less. Ubisoft obviously ran out of ideas after Brotherhood and is now trying to continue the franchise and make the last few scheckles they can off the hard work of Assassins Creed II and Brotherhood. This game is rudderless at this point, and as soon as I get this last bit done, it's going on Ebay or Craigslist so it's not a total loss. Save your money and get this used from the discount / sale shelf in about a year for $9.99 if you really want it, or rent it. Assassins Creed III Rating: 3/10.

  25. beckywarren57 says:

    All I have to say about Assassins Creed 3 is I WANT MY MONEY BACK!”!!!!!!!!!!

  26. John mcCormick says:

    I love the game but i do agree with a previous comment saying the Haytham segments are better than the Connor segments . The hunting and gathering segments are a trip and what fun the bear is trying to take down. I got a bit bored with the feathers and some of the trips for the treasures but it was forgotten when getting my guns on with the my ship. I recommend the PC version as the climbing is SO much easier now and the fun of exploring rules … Who cares about the god angle and the templars etc . The writer was so biased against that it ruined the article. I love the mix of myth and fact and love a previous comment saying the reviewing dude should go back to popcap games and take his biased views with him was abso correct.

  27. bob says:

    this game is awesome make a ottherone

  28. sheryl says:

    Will there be any people of color? I can help as a PA.

    Please let me know.

    Sheryl Jones

    Henry Ford Community College

  29. Marin0311 says:

    I just staryed playing, and.gotta tell you, I love it. Remember, this is a game, meant for entertainment. Not something to be taken seriously.

  30. randomcat says:

    The game was broken ,when they shipped it . Get your money back.

  31. neverworrybehappy says:

    I think this game will be as amazing as AC2. All the historical reference make the game even more interesting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Close
E-mail It
Powered by ShareThis