Assassin's Creed III coming October 30

Ubisoft boss Yves Guillemot confirmed to investors that the studio is on track to launch the third full chapter of its Assassin's Creed franchise on October 30.

"We will push the title a lot because it's a fantastic product that the team has been working for three years...What we have seen is just fabulous," he said.

Assassin's Creed III is predicted by Guillemot to be “the biggest launch in Ubisoft history”, and is currently in development for PS3, Xbox 360, PC, and Wii U. Zero information was given regarding the game's plot, however the most popular theory is it will take place on US soil during The American Revolution. This theory is supported by coordinates to New York found buried in Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood's 'Da Vinci Disappearance' DLC, and mention of the famous war in a recent Ubisoft fan survey.

Another big question is whether or not Assassin's Creed III will feature an all-new multiplayer build. If so, this would essentially render Assassin's Creed: Revelation's online community obsolete before its first anniversary.

Assassin's Creed 3's 2012 release was rumored earlier this week in a “leaked” Ubisoft release schedule which stated the Animus-based sequel would arrive this year with Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Retribution. Ubisoft quickly issued a statement calling the list “inaccurate”, but now we know the studio wasn't being 100% clear. Could this mean a hasty Splinter Cell announcement is just around the corner?


  • ChrisCultista - February 15, 2012 12:50 p.m.

    I hope that only a little of the standoff games story will be in three. Because I only played ASSCRED 2. Not that the other games were bad, but they just had that 'We are going to milk this' feel to them.
  • Cyberninja - February 15, 2012 12:59 p.m.

    i havent played the series but i think the other 2 games were really important to the story so you'll probably have to play them.
  • strikerz911 - February 15, 2012 1:27 p.m.

    Brotherhood and Revelations are actually pretty good games on their own. You should try them.
  • Caenlen25 - February 15, 2012 12:51 p.m.

    I am excited for it, own all of them on the PC. We all know the series is getting stale, and the developer knows this too. I really expect some nice additions for the big AC III. Also, having to type a security just to post a comment is also getting stale. Go buy the Taco Bell $5 vita box, go online, there security is much easier, just slide over an ingredient (cheese, tomatoes, whatever it asks you to slide over on to the taco). Seriously guys, make something like that.
  • cj12297 - February 15, 2012 12:51 p.m.

    I'm hoping it's set during the Irish 1916 rising. That's never going to happen though. But it would be awesome.
  • MCN2011 - February 15, 2012 12:52 p.m.

    So... WiiU for October 2012?
  • sheah1 - February 15, 2012 1:04 p.m.

    Great! I love it when Publishers release the same game with slight differences! Especially when they break perfectly fine stuff, that's the best!
  • Person5 - February 15, 2012 1:12 p.m.

    I liked AC1 to an extent even if it was very repetitive. Enter AC2 I find it amazing, then comes AC brotherhood a year later which I was not considering until I read the reviews saying it had enough gameplay additions to stand on its own. The next year comes AC revelations which I figure will be brotherhood but with less heart, and brotherhood was AC2 with less heart itself. Now comes AC3 a year after that and I have to wonder. I think Activision has proved that you can't just keep releasing games every year, it just doesn't work. I want to like this game, but I can't help but think it will be another half baked yearly entry like the last two, I'd rather they put at least two years into development of the single player and go without AC for a little bit. It's better than a rushed year's work for a quick buck with a lot of that time going towards refining the MP. I don't know, AC really seems to have lost what made it good, I'm worried that this is just called AC3 because they couldn't think of another subtitle. and one last thought, if the team has been working on this for three years, what time was spent on Revelations and Brotherhood?
  • db1331 - February 15, 2012 1:31 p.m.

    This, exactly. The game is just too repetitive. It's become like Madden or CoD, except with an overlapping story between each yearly release. If you are going to put out a game every year, you're going to sacrifice something, usually quality or depth. AC is one of those games where you take a year or two off from, then get the urge to come back to it. Then after playing it, you remember why you took a break. Look at Skyrim. There were over 5 years between the release of Oblivion and Skyrim. What if Bethesda had put out 4 other Elder Scrolls games in that time? And believe me, they could have if they wanted to. So what if Skyrim was TES IX instead of TES V? It wouldn't be anywhere near as good as it turned out. As for me, I finished the first AC. I thought it was repetitive, but wanted to see where the story was going. I bought AC II sometime later in a $10 sale. I started playing it and thought, "Wow, this is so much better than the original!" Then, around 8 hours in, after I got to the 3rd city, which had the same missions as the other 2 cities, and I no longer knew why I was killing who, I got bored with it and stopped playing. I think I've seen everything the series has to offer, unless they make some radical change, which I don't see happening since there are millions of people who love getting the same game over and over.
  • meagaman45 - February 15, 2012 1:39 p.m.

    it is impossible for them to push the game to a later date because it plays off the 2012 end of world theory.
  • SpadesSlick - February 15, 2012 1:48 p.m.

    I'm totally down for killing some limey brits with George Washington and Jefferson if the american revolution rumors are true.
  • Redeater - February 15, 2012 1:49 p.m.

    I was one of the biggest AC fans out there and would go so far as saying Brotherhood was one of the finest games this generation. Now my interest is almost nothing. I will buy AC 3 because I have invested so much time into the series but it had better be stellar if they want me for AC 3.5. If you have already bored one of your top fans how are the rest of your customers going to feel? This series reeks of Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero.
  • mray7 - February 15, 2012 2:05 p.m.

    Ok I love this franchise. 2 is my favorite by far, but I still loved the other 3. I am ok with this game coming out this year. Ubisoft has a number of HUGE teams working on these games and it sounds like they have had the team working on this game since AC2 came out. Ubisoft Montreal has 1700 employees. Compared to a company like Bungie (around 200 employees) they can afford to have shorter time periods in between games because they have the manpower. And BTW these games are not the SAME games with slight differences and anyone who says that obviously hasn't played them.
  • kyle94 - February 15, 2012 2:26 p.m.

    Here's hoping that the third game is good. (Though, I'm sure that they'll be turning it into a trilogy and stretching it out for as long as they can.) To be honest, I actually thought Revelations was a better game than Brotherhood (except for the puzzles being replaced by that horrible platformer) However, they've still yet to make a game as great as the second one. It was just a giant step up from the previous one, the music was amazing, the environments and cities were more beautiful than anything else in the series so far, in my opinion. And the story felt the most emotional and drew me in the most.
  • winner2 - February 15, 2012 2:31 p.m.

    "We will push the title a lot because it's a fantastic product that the team has been working for three years...What we have seen is just fabulous," Translation: "We will continue to milk this franchise because it's become very easy and fast to make money off of it...what we have seen is that we can destroy what was once a great game and still make money off of the pile of crap we've turned it into"
  • SonicX_89 - February 15, 2012 2:56 p.m.

    Hopefully, they change Desmond's face for AC III. I only played Revelations for about a couple of hours, but every time I saw Desmond I thought he looked like the biggest douche in the universe.
  • ACGUY - February 15, 2012 3:44 p.m.

    It would be cooler if it was in this game's present....
  • essiy - February 15, 2012 4:07 p.m.

    If the game is set during the American revolution, I have a slight fear that it's going to end up a FPS. Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy a few FPS titles such as the fallout series, I don't want this series to go that way. I mean, of course a modern setting to the game would rely on the use of fire-arms, but to me, if not done correctly, could ruin what makes Assassin's creed so dear to my heart. Either way, I'll be standing there with my money in hand at the local game store.
  • Pwnz0r3d - February 15, 2012 4:56 p.m.

    Those rifles still took quite a bit of time to reload. It would be no different than using the mounted pistol or dealing with a Janissary.
  • SpadesSlick - February 15, 2012 7:56 p.m.

    And the fact that revolutionary war era guns had almost next to nothing in terms of accuracy. Hence the leading war tactic of the time being 'line up a bunch of guys and fire in the same direction, hopefully we will hit someone.'

Showing 1-20 of 33 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000