Kantor said: Shinobi-san said: Does anybody know why they decided to change the combat after brotherhood? I mean the combat in brotherhood was perfect. I would spend hours trying to perfect and complete the challenges. It was quite similar to Batman's combat but i would say even better due to variety of moves you needed to do to deal with different enemy types. Whereas with Batman its mostly counter attacking and timing. Anyways i dont think AC3 was bad because of glitches...i hardly came across any during my PS3 playthrough. But the game was a mess. Literally it was a mess. i cant find a better word to describe it. The game is all over the place...insanely long tutorial/intro...switching from Kenway to the main character...going from the towns to the wild...no real pacing to the story....urgh. Complete mess. I really tried so hard to get into the game Brotherhood's combat was extremely easy, and one of the few things with which I can credit AC3 is that it was more challenging. Like you, I had no problem with bugs, and I agree completely. The story was a mess, Connor was rubbish and completely inconsistent, the cities were dull and lifeless, there was little meaningful side content, the hunting and trading were pointless, and the ending was one of the worst I have ever seen.

Can't quite remember Brotherhood, but the combat in AC3 is much much easier than in Revelations.

Barozi said: Kantor said: Shinobi-san said: Does anybody know why they decided to change the combat after brotherhood? I mean the combat in brotherhood was perfect. I would spend hours trying to perfect and complete the challenges. It was quite similar to Batman's combat but i would say even better due to variety of moves you needed to do to deal with different enemy types. Whereas with Batman its mostly counter attacking and timing. Anyways i dont think AC3 was bad because of glitches...i hardly came across any during my PS3 playthrough. But the game was a mess. Literally it was a mess. i cant find a better word to describe it. The game is all over the place...insanely long tutorial/intro...switching from Kenway to the main character...going from the towns to the wild...no real pacing to the story....urgh. Complete mess. I really tried so hard to get into the game Brotherhood's combat was extremely easy, and one of the few things with which I can credit AC3 is that it was more challenging. Like you, I had no problem with bugs, and I agree completely. The story was a mess, Connor was rubbish and completely inconsistent, the cities were dull and lifeless, there was little meaningful side content, the hunting and trading were pointless, and the ending was one of the worst I have ever seen. Can't quite remember Brotherhood, but the combat in AC3 is much much easier than in Revelations.

Brotherhood was "counter once and then press square repeatedly to obliterate all of your enemies".

AC3 brought in the whole rifle thing, which at least added a little bit of challenge.

It's worse than that. Connor learns about Washington's brutality towards the native people, and he is furious, saying he will never work for him again.

And guess what the next mission is? Back to being Washington's lapdog. It's like they almost had some inspiration and decided to be a little bit creative and controversial with the story, then said "fuck it, they'll buy it anyway".

I recently beat it, and it was certainly the glitchest entry in the series, by far. A total mess from a technical standpoint.

Killstreaks

Man i loved it. I guess it did make combat fairly easy. But it also gave the combat a depth that the other games don't have.

Taking out 10 guys on the screen was easy, hell even 20 but when you decide to go beyond that number in a given time limit then well things get really interesting. I guess the combat really shined in the challenges.

But then i again i even liked it during the story...it wasnt so much about losing to your enemies but more about how cool and efficiently can you kill them. Which imo is really where AC should take the combat. Others would probably disagree.

My comment was meant to be a joke. Normally googling the ending of games doesn't really convey what happens that well (or at least as well as the game) but ACIII is the exception to that.