It’s not a game breaker by any means and it’s still better than the original version that released all those years ago it’s just annoying to see a problem crop up that really shouldn’t be there.īut what about the rest of the game? It’s a mixed bag, really. It’s a shame that this happens as a large part of the game takes place in the frontier, and there’s lots to see, find, and do out there. It all seems fine during the first couple of hours, but once you’re free to explore the great American frontier things start to take a tumble in the frame rate department. It’s not terrible by any means, but it can be distracting. You’d think that with the big increase of power, RAM, and all the other technical jazz that’s been crammed into the newer consoles, a game released seven years ago would have no problems in maintaining a solid frame rate. It’s also worth noting that the game doesn’t run perfectly well, either. I enjoyed the cutscenes in Assassin’s Creed III back in the day but I’m struggling to keep away from the ‘skip’ button this time around. The new lighting techniques have turned the cast of characters into mannequins! Lots of detail has been lost in this transition and I can’t say I’m best pleased about it.ĭuring the normal run of gameplay it’s fine – you’re not exactly looking people in the eye before you stab them (unless that’s your thing?) but during cutscenes it is very noticeable. The PS4/Xbox One versions, however, look downright odd.
Even on the PS3 version, character faces looked really well done, considering it was running on a machine released in 2006.
While the new lighting engine makes the game’s world feel a little more believable and easier to read, it kind of screws up one of the best things the game had going for it – character faces. Switching over to the remastered version on my 4K set was like night and day, though not everything is quite right in the re-release. The resolution was really low, the frame rate was piss poor, and the general look of the game seemed a little dated. The way I remembered it was not how it was being shown on the telly.
I hooked up my dusty PS3 to the spare TV in my bedroom (a 1080p set) and was a little disappointed. However, going back to the PS3 version shows just how far we’ve come. I’ve always thought it did, even back when I played it on the PS3. In fairness, the game does look pretty good. And yes, I’ll probably end up getting the damn thing for the Nintendo Switch, too.
I’ve been lucky enough to play the game across both consoles, though admittedly the mid-gen refreshes – the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. I’ll get onto the gameplay and what not in a moment, but I’m guessing that lots of people will want to know how the game runs and looks on PS4 and Xbox One. But is it any good? Does the gameplay still hold up by today’s standards? Does it look like it belongs on the current-gen machines? There’s a lot to talk about, so sit your bum down, grab your favourite hot beverage and let me tell you all about it.įirst things first, the remastering. Now, in 2019, we’re invited back to the colonial time period once more in the form of a remaster.
It really is the pinnacle of Assassin’s Creed, and the last pure Assassin’s Creed game in the series before Ubisoft starting pushing the franchise in a new, RPG-focused direction.Īssassin’s Creed III was originally released way back in 2012 and was one of the last Assassin’s Creed games to release on the PS3/Xbox 360, followed only by Assassin’s Creed IV: Black Flag, and the oft-forgotten Assassin’s Creed Rogue. Even when I was being forced to do yet another tailing mission, I couldn’t help but fall in love with this game. While the collective internet may have hated its slow start and eventual protagonist, I loved it. I’ve got a soft spot for Assassin’s Creed III.