After playing this game for more than 60 hours, I believe I can give a pretty comprehensive review of the game.

Where to start? After finishing the 2:d game and its sequels, the fan base had a lot of expectations of the next installment in the series. Some were met, others weren't. Unfortunately, the latter scenario proved to be truer than the former. Needless to say, the game came as quite a surprise when it first hit the internet, people being surprised at a sequel.

It's obvious from the get go that Ubisoft built almost everything from scratch, and it sure looks that way, with improved graphics, a fluid and satisfying fight-mechanism and the introduction of epic naval warfare. One cannot help but feel excitement when experiencing all of this within the game's first sequences. With that said, the intro-part of the games proves to be far to long and redundant, almost to the point that it feels like one enormous tutorial that you have to suffer through. It's not until some good 3-4 hours that you get introduced to the Assassin's Creed the fans are so familiar with. It's obvious Ubisoft had good intentions, also mentioning how they wanted the 3:d part in the series to be a great addition but also a great intro for newcomers to the AC games, whilst it might've helped those new to the series, it sure backfired on those already familiar with the series.

Furthermore, it feels like the game suffers from identity crisis: introducing new graphics, a new setting, new mechanics, naval battles etc. but can't connect all of these new element into one cohesive game, easy for the players to digest. It rather feels like rollercoaster. Moments when you're out on the sea for the first time feels so epic that nothing can't beat it, only to have that special moment destroyed by introducing the player to characters that are hard to connect with, and as such making it a letdown. The same applies to all the other parts of the game, most notably the character-development. Even if Connor might not be the most charismatic Assassin we've seen, he sure have his reasons for being so, presented well done by Ubisoft, but it's just not enough to emphasize on the main characters, it's rarely the player cares for others in the game (with the homestead missions being a rare example). There was so much potential here with so many interesting characters presented to us (not to mention Benjamin Franklin whose only purpose in the game is so bleak, he's almost a non-existent one.). The Washington DLC:s were obviously a shot at character-development, but it just wasn't enough and came far too late to make the overall game any better.

All in all, Assassin's Creed 3 is a disappointment. Not only to veterans to the series, but also to those who are new to the series. The ideas are well presented, almost flawless. But it doesn't help much when the whole game doesn't feel connected and feels more like a well-crafted mess. Nonetheless, the good parts are so good that they lift the game, but ultimately the lack of a cohesive story and under-developed characters, lowers the game's overall quality.

I'll give this game 3 bloody revolutions out of 5!

After playing this game for more than 60 hours, I believe I can give a pretty comprehensive review of the game. Where to start? After finishing the 2:d game and its sequels, the fan base had a lot of expectations of the next installment in the series. Some were met, others weren't. Unfortunately, the latter scenario proved to be truer than the former. Needless to say, the game came as quite a surprise when it first hit the internet, people being surprised at a sequel. It's obvious from the get go that Ubisoft built almost everything from scratch, and it sure looks that way, with improved graphics, a fluid and satisfying fight-mechanism and the introduction of epic naval warfare. One cannot help but feel excitement when experiencing all of this within the game's first sequences. With that said, the intro-part of the games proves to be far to long and redundant, almost to the point that it feels like one enormous tutorial that you have to suffer through. It's not until some good 3-4 hours that you get introduced to the Assassin's Creed the fans are so familiar with. It's obvious Ubisoft had good intentions, also mentioning how they wanted the 3:d part in the series to be a great addition but also a great intro for newcomers to the AC games, whilst it might've helped those new to the series, it sure backfired on those already familiar with the series. Furthermore, it feels like the game suffers from identity crisis: introducing new graphics, a new setting, new mechanics, naval battles etc. but can't connect all of these new element into one cohesive game, easy for the players to digest. It rather feels like rollercoaster. Moments when you're out on the sea for the first time feels so epic that nothing can't beat it, only to have that special moment destroyed by introducing the player to characters that are hard to connect with, and as such making it a letdown. The same applies to all the other parts of the game, most notably the character-development. Even if Connor might not be the most charismatic Assassin we've seen, he sure have his reasons for being so, presented well done by Ubisoft, but it's just not enough to emphasize on the main characters, it's rarely the player cares for others in the game (with the homestead missions being a rare example). There was so much potential here with so many interesting characters presented to us (not to mention Benjamin Franklin whose only purpose in the game is so bleak, he's almost a non-existent one.). The Washington DLC:s were obviously a shot at character-development, but it just wasn't enough and came far too late to make the overall game any better. All in all, Assassin's Creed 3 is a disappointment. Not only to veterans to the series, but also to those who are new to the series. The ideas are well presented, almost flawless. But it doesn't help much when the whole game doesn't feel connected and feels more like a well-crafted mess. Nonetheless, the good parts are so good that they lift the game, but ultimately the lack of a cohesive story and under-developed characters, lowers the game's overall quality. I'll give this game 3 bloody revolutions out of 5!