10 Reasons You Were Wrong About Assassin?s Creed 3

Posted on Feb 13, 2015

From Eagle Vision actually making sense, to the coolest location in the whole franchise.

Ubisoft

Ubisoft

Like the runt of a farmyard litter, Assassin?s Creed 3 is not a game that has ever fared well in comparison to the other titles in Ubisoft?s flagship series. It?s mostly referenced as the weakest instalment to this day, and was even seen as a step backwards by some. Truly the game didn?t quite capture the majority of players in the way that the adventures of the remarkable Ezio did, but does it really deserve to be so readily criticised?

Of course not.

While it may not be the strongest of a very established franchise, AC III was certainly still a very good game. The game?s adventure saw players leave the familiarity of towering cities for the first time in favour of offering up wild forests and snow plains as the best playground the series has seen so far, and the insight into the lineage of the Templars introduced some of the series? best moments by far.

Rather than change the formula of the series, Ubisoft simply honed the recipe. While it could be suggested they made the mistake of pushing change on an audience that wasn?t willing to accept it, there can be no real suggestion that Assassin?s Creed 3 was a bad game. With all this in mind, it?s worth putting together a list of the ten things that the game did very well; ten things that players regularly forget about when flippantly criticising it as the ?worst in the franchise?.

Assassin?s Creed 3 really was a worthwhile step for the series, and it?s high time people realise that.

Read the full article online ( external link ) External Link to Article

5 more