Revitalised: Assassin’s Creed – Liberation Coming To PC

Of all the things that my PC needs right now, another Assassin’s Creed game is somewhere near the bottom of the list, right near the Bing Toolbar, the Bing Desktop and Bing. I enjoyed the second game, playing it as a bonkers historical tourism simulator, but I didn’t find the time or the energy to trot through the entire thing. Even people who liked playing II three times didn’t tend to like playing III once, so I ignored that one. Black Flag did catch the outermost tendrils of my interest when a man appeared to punch a shark in one of the trailers, but there will probably be a hundred hours of not shark-punching. That’s a lot of Ass Creed and there’s more to come. Liberation, a Vita spin-off, will be coming to PC in a highly defined version.

Liberation has a few things in its favour. It’s set in New Orleans, which is one of the places I’d like to live, so I’m more inclined to spend my time there, even if it looks ramshackle, oppressive and unpleasant in the past. There is still bourbon, right? There is still jazz? Perhaps not. Perhaps there are only swords and chains.

Thankfully, Liberation has a hero to solve the problem of swords and chains, and her name is Aveline de Grandpré. I’ve read a little about her background and she sounds like an interesting choice of protagonist, crossing class and social boundaries. In my incomplete experience, the social position of women in the Assassin’s Creed series tends to be prostitute, ingénue or Ezio’s mum. That Aveline appears to have a stronger connection with a historical struggle, rather than some form of unconvincing science fiction destiny, is impressive. Of course, it probably turns out that she’s an alien cyborg sent from the future-past to tie a Templar’s shoelaces together as he prepares to deliver a rousing speech, causing him to fall through a weeping time-wound, which regurgitates him as a mellow infant.

I don’t know. Is that the sort of thing that happens in these games?

The trailer says Liberation is out ‘soon’ at which point I’ll try to find out the answers. Or not. Interesting protagonist or not, I expect it’ll be pretty much the same cup of tea as the rest and it’s not a beverage I can imagine myself quaffing down to the dregs.


  1. Drinking with Skeletons says:

    Credit where credit is due, Ubisoft will always try to support even the most doomed platform. And then port their games to platforms people actually use. And then treat those people like garbage through delayed releases and restrictive DRM. So maybe not so much “credit” as “foolishness” and “assholery.”

    • Ravenholme says:

      You mean apart from the fact they about-faced on the terribly restrictive DRM and are actually pretty decent (barring arbitrary PC delays) these days.

      Right then.

      • crazyd says:

        They still dump a Uplay requirement into just about all of their releases. Having to use that crap client is always a negative to me when considering buying their games

        • Jason Moyer says:

          Yeah, that’s why I refuse to play any Valve games.

          Ok, not really.

          • Doganpc says:

            I accepted Steam because it was Valve who did it. They made money making good games and thought that online distribution was the way to go with things. Then all the old established publishers saw what was going on there and figured, why pay them when we can make our own and then we can exert all our draconian demands onto our customers and make sure we rake in as much potential cash as possible without sharing…

            Yeah, so fuck you EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft for trying to shove shit down my throat. Steam may not be perfect, but at least it gets out of my way.

          • greenbananas says:

            “Yeah, that’s why I refuse to play any Valve games.

            Ok, not really.”

            Well… yes, actually. That’s pretty much it.

          • Emeraude says:

            Funny how many people can’t fathom the idea that one would boycott Valve…

          • ResonanceCascade says:

            It’s true, never underestimate the pettiness of video game players.

          • Emeraude says:

            Petty ? Boycotting the company that put the nail in the coffin of second hand sales and lending games to your family and friends on the PC is petty ?

            Especially since it’s not as if they had given anything of value in exchange…

          • ResonanceCascade says:

            Yeah, petty. At best. Possibly even petulant at this point, since it’s a battle that was lost nearly a decade ago. And frankly, I pay far less for Steam games than I ever did for used PC games in a brick and mortar store, so that part of the argument is entirely academic.

          • Emeraude says:

            “I have no problem with it, so there is no problem”.

            Also: a battle that was lost nearly a decade ago. ? I do love myself some uchronia.

          • ResonanceCascade says:

            You aren’t doing much to sell me on the whole “I’m not being petty” thing. But best of luck to you with the boycott.

          • Emeraude says:

            Petty in the way I’ve addressed you ? Well, yes, I don’t think you’ve deserved better.
            As far as refusing to use Steam is concerned ? Don’t think so, no.

            And thank you for the luck, but it won’t be needed. Chances that I install the thing by accident are very scarce – unless you want to tell me that the thing auto-installs itself without user consent on top of its other faults.

        • Apocalypse says:

          Be fair. Uplay is only crap if you compare it to todays steam. Compare the current Uplay to lets say steam from 5 years ago, and suddently Uplay becomes quite a nice platform.

          Actually it could be the second best digital distribution platform on the market, which is telling a lot about why valve is making so much money.
          Even does handle actually worse (but DRM-Free baby, we still love you), and impulse who used to have this title went down the drain once gamestop bought them.

          Does Uplay still sucks compared to steam? Certainly. Still they do make progress, and just like dog education you need to encourage good behavior with rewards, and stop slapping the poor thing years later over old issues. Hey, the Uplay offline mode works even better than the one from steam, which is indeed very good, because the Uplay servers do not.

          • Emeraude says:

            GoG is actually all I want it to be, now that I think of it: it doesn’t exist as a platform.

          • Phantom_Renegade says:

            I’ve read that argument before and it was nonsense then and still is now. You don’t compare products to past products, you compare them to current products. You might get away with it if it was optional, but Uplay is obligatory.

            When buying a car you don’t go, okay compared to current cars it’s pretty shit, but compared to the ford t it’s a great car! No, you then simply buy a current car. But you can’t, because to play ubisoft games, you need to get a secondary, obligatory software, which is worse then their competitors products. So you can’t use a competitors product, which is why we get to complain about uplay, and origin, and GFWL being complete and utter shit.

          • Emeraude says:


            There is value to comparing with the past when you think all current offers are inferior to the ones you had in the past though…

          • Apocalypse says:

            You seem to have misunderstood my defense of uNoPlay, my point was, that the service takes more fire than it deserves. 5 years behind the competition is indeed a great gap in quality. Strangely enough Uplay still seems to be the second best digital distribution platform around these days, which is a strong indicator how bad the rest of the competition is.

            Still uplay in its current status is to me at least tolerable, even when the platform indeed does reduce the value of ubisoft games.

      • Emeraude says:

        It hadn’t occurred to me that they had stopped using uPlay…

        • Ravenholme says:

          I think that’s their perogative, and at least they don’t use uPlay to justify not putting it on more common digital distributers. And all the truly horrible DRM aspects (Always Online etc) have long died a death.

          So no, I don’t really agree with the “restrictive DRM” line.

          • Emeraude says:

            To each his own, I’m still ten years ago when the mandatory online activation with account tying was deemed unacceptable – too restrictive.

            Still is to me.

            I think that’s their prerogative

            And it’s mine to despise them for doing so, as potential buyer.

          • The Random One says:

            If I could put my Steam library on uPlay I wouldn’t even hesitate.

          • In Zod We Trust says:

            Let’s not forget that for a while uPlay contained a goddamn rootkit that allowed very easy access to a PC system that they helpfully forgot to mention in their updates so they could get easier access to your hardware specs. I don’t think a company that would do that have their customers’ best interests at heart.

            link to

      • golem09 says:

        I will think about praising ubisoft again when they stop to force me to use uPlay with a steam game.

        • Apocalypse says:

          Won´t ever happen, they seem to have integrated their whole framework into uplay, meaning that if they don´t change to steamworks they have to use Uplay for achievements, match-making with friends, etc
          If you accept this in steam, and imho you should, because it is imo a good practice for features like this, than you should accept their Uplay client as launcher environment as well. At least as long as the stupid thing is actually working and does not make any extra trouble,

          It does indeed make sense, and unlike EA the experience is much more clean and you do not have a mess with DLCs, it just works these days. Mostly. At least when the ubisoft servers are not down. Which they are more often than my private internet connection. Which is sad, but not as sad as it sounds.

      • CelticPixel says:

        I consider Uplay an unwanted hoop to jump through but it’s got an offline mode these days and it’s not too intrusive, just a glorified splash/settings screen really. Annoyed that my cheevo’s are tied to Uplay and not Steam though.

        I usually complain about having had enough of AC, but I’m intrigued by the black female protagonist and will consider giving this a shot.

        • Apocalypse says:

          But if you give the new one a shot, than there is a good reason to actually play the old ones at least once, they will be anyway often enough in a good sale.

          That is btw my main problem with the series. AC was on release buy for me, and while it had lots of mistakes, I did not regret spending money on it. AC2 was actually even better and I would have enjoyed it as well, but the always-on-drm was for me a reason to wait for a sale, and after that I am always behind in the series and never was able to actually catch enough up to even consider buying again at full price. And except for revelations, which I just recently finished I would have bought them all at full price without regret, but not as long as I am not have finished the old ones. So Ubisoft has lost just because their always-on-DRM in about $35 on each following game and AC2 itself. And I am not the only one with this problem, it really adds up I guess.

      • Drinking with Skeletons says:

        They dropped it from future releases, but isn’t it still the same in the older titles? It’s the sole reason why I’ve avoided both HoMM6 and that futuristic Anno; there are elements of the games that are locked out if you aren’t logged in. I’m not going to pay for a game that penalizes you for playing a certain way, regardless of whether or not the features are actually significant.

        EDIT: It’s also just obnoxious. Assassin’s Creed 2 offered you bonus knives and a tiny bonus level and some other piddly things if you used uPlay (and this was true on the consoles as well!), but my opinion is that I can get achievements in other ways and don’t need yet ANOTHER carrot-on-a-stick just so Ubisoft can…I don’t even know, raise awareness or some other marketing BS probably. DRM is just the most obviously toxic element of the system.

        • Phantom_Renegade says:

          Anno 2070 you mean? That ones fucked even worse since it’s got Tages 3 machine limit as well. They really went full hog on the customer hate on that one. Well, not fully I suppose. They could have added GFWL as well.

          • Apocalypse says:

            Another game I will not buy ever because of that very reason.

    • Kadayi says:

      What rock have you been living under?

  2. Nim says:

    I regret to inform you dearest members of the audience that I cannot tell which Assassin’s Creed game is which anymore.

    • gunny1993 says:

      It’s the one with the stabbing, climbing and silly plot

  3. basilisk says:

    I think I’ll be getting this for the protagonist alone. And I actually liked AC3 (ducks and covers).

    • RobinOttens says:

      I will one-up you by saying I loved AC3! Though maybe next time they should make sure to actually put all the cool new mechanics and homestead soap opera in the main game instead of hiding it all in the side content.

      Always wanted to check this game out, now I won’t have to borrow my friend’s Vita to do so!

      *also runs for cover, planning not to come out until a year from now when AC4 and Liberation are cheaper*

      • soulblur says:

        Loving it? Maybe not loving it. But I liked AC3. I thought it was a decent start. I like the smooth parkour through the forests. I disliked Connor’s permanently surly attitude. I liked the hunting. I disliked the fact that you seldom actually assassinated anyone, instead just murdering them. The homestead was nice. The economy was silly and dysfunctional. So it was a mixed bag, but a lot of good stuff within that.

    • Ravenholme says:

      I enjoyed it too! But it was despite Connor as a protagonist, I must say. I’m glad they got back to the more gray morality of AC1, where (barring the real world segments) the struggle between Assassins and Templars was very much ideological rather than good/bad.

    • lorddon says:

      Black, female, and sensibly dressed protagonist? I’ll support this on principle alone.

      • ResonanceCascade says:

        I played the Vita version, the vaguely interesting protagonist is about the only good thing about it.

        • Jalan says:

          The score was fantastic as well. Fantastic as in game score of the year material. Leagues above what Balfe turned in for AC III.

    • noodlecake says:

      There’s a lot to like about ACIII. No reason to pretend it’s a guilty pleasure. :P Stand up for your taste.

  4. slerbal says:

    The AssCreed games don’t appeal to me, but I have to admit UbiSoft is putting out some lovely non-AAA titles (Blood Dragon, Might & Magic X). I’m intrigued to see how Valiant Hearts turns out – link to

    Even if I’m no longer the target audience for the big “annualised block buster” games it is good to see them supporting riskier, smaller games too. It *might* even convince me that I can tolerate Uplay on my machine…

    • Vandelay says:

      As big publishers go, Ubisoft is by far the best, producing risky and genuinely original games. Even AC, as annual franchises go, is far more interesting than Call of Duty or Battlefield/Medal of Honour. At least it offers something unique by primarily focuses on the single player (although the multiplayer is rather excellent too.)

      They made some dickish moves, such as the always on DRM and… the always on DRM, but that has been rectified. If they could just release PC games at the same time as consoles then I would have no complaints at all about them.

      • KenTWOu says:

        If they could just release decent PC ports and support them after release I would have no complaints at all about them.

    • bananomgd says:

      Rayman Legends is brilliant. I’m just waiting for it to drop a price a bit to pick it up. Played it a friends house with my SO and it was the most platforming fun we’ve had since NSMB.

  5. NicholasTimothyJones says:

    I should be excited for this but for some reason I am not. I am not sure I would enjoy it that much.

    I thoroughly enjoyed ACII and the first part of Brotherhood but never finished it or even started Revelations. I ended up reading the novels instead.
    I did play ACIII, it started off great with Haytham, slowed with Connor, picked up a little bit with the naval battales but it soon started to drag again and only forced myself through thanks to Forsaken to see how it tied in.

    I guess I will give it a play anyway.

  6. gunny1993 says:


  7. Wurstwaffel says:

    I like me a good AC spin-off. Brotherhood and Revelations were both good fun. Haven’t played AC3 yet for lack of time, still I’m glad there’s a lot of AC to look forward to.
    Then again, it’s a mainstream title and we’re not supposed to like those.

    • Iskariot says:

      As far as I am concerned you are free to like whatever you want.
      I am a huge AC fan too, although I am very critical about some aspects and some of the AC games in general. Nevertheless it is a unique and awesome IP.

  8. SkittleDiddler says:

    Jesus Christ, I can’t keep track of these redundantly shitty games anymore. The AAA video games industry at this point is just like a welfare mom so caught in the cycle of dependency that she can only manage to continuously pop out more genetically-cursed clones of herself in order to keep the guvment satisfied.

    Seriously- fuck me, fuck you, and fuck everyone else who continues to buy this crap.

    • CelticPixel says:

      Chin up, chap!

    • analydilatedcorporatestyle says:

      By ‘buy this crap’ do you mean your closeted and obnoxious views on society.

      I hope your next shit is a pineapple!

      • SkittleDiddler says:

        The hell are you on about? You’re taking a silly analogy and turning it into a political screed. Chill, bro.

        • Beelzebud says:

          You don’t get to make a “Welfare mom” analogy, in regards to a video game company, and then complain that someone else “got political”.

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            Oh, please. This isn’t the place to be arguing about sociopolitical beliefs. Or maybe it is, seeing as how a significant portion of RPS’s readership consists of the kind of keyboard warriors that don’t ever bother to stop and consider whether or not the target of their ire is making an actual political statement.

            It was an offhanded analogy from a liberal US citizen who only takes politics seriously when it’s appropriate to do so. Get over it.

          • Kadayi says:

            Truth. Still its SkittleDiddler were talking about here. Everything else is wrong, apart from his opinion. :)

  9. Serenegoose says:

    Ok, yes, good. I didn’t like assassins creed 3 for many reasons (like… the characters, and the cities) so removing them and bringing this game to PC is just such a good move in my opinion. Surprised at this genuinely good decision, but I hope that the remastering is quite intensive.

  10. Danda says:

    Ubisoft is adding Uplay to sequels of games that didn’t use Uplay, like Rayman Origins or the original Rocksmith. It’s terrible.

  11. Iskariot says:

    I have heard some good stuff about this AC game, so I am interested.
    It features a female protagonist, which is a first for AC I think. I like that too.

    By the way I personally have never experienced problems with uplay like I did with GFWL. GFWL scares me, because I am constantly afraid something might go wrong… again.
    Uplay on the other hand never bothered me. Never had connection problems and never had problems with offline play and their download service for registered games I already owned and wanted to reinstall worked flawlessly.
    But, perhaps I am just lucky. I don’t know.

    • Vandelay says:

      Same experience here. I regularly had issues with GFWL not logging in or being stuck in an update loop, but Uplay has always just been an extra click. Sure, that extra click shouldn’t be there, but I’m not going to rant about it.

      (Although, I did lose my save game of Far Cry 3 after moving to an SSD. I’m sure Uplay should store cloud saves, but for some reason didn’t. Then again, I lost my save of Civ5 too because I didn’t tick the cloud save box, so user error is quite likely in that case.)

  12. yuri999 says:

    AC3 played better on the second run which most people never tried. I played the game during launch time, hated it and forgot about it. Cut many months later after the final DLC for George Washington has been released and I decide to give it another go.

    Holy shit… the game is infinitely better the second time around when you see certain things it does and why it does them. The story is infinitely more satisfying and I learned to let go of playing the game according to the optional objectives which further made me feel happy about it.

    TL;DR: Give AC3 another go and play it without looking or doing the optional objectives.

  13. Vinraith says:

    I’m pleased to see this made it to PC. For all that AC3 is a mess, this one has some potential. A genuinely different protagonist is a welcome thing.

  14. jonahcutter says:

    “In my incomplete experience, the social position of women in the Assassin’s Creed series tends to be prostitute, ingénue or Ezio’s mum. ”

    That’s not representative of how women are presented in AC. There’s Lucy, Rebecca the hacker who created the Animus, Claudia a noblewoman who while a carnal interest of Ezio proved she was more than capable of holding her own in varied situations, and many of the assassins you can recruit in Brotherhood are female. One of the primary antagonists in Brotherhood was a woman. I’m probably forgetting others. I only really remember AC2 and Brotherhood.

    Women in the series are not at all relegated to the roles of girlfriend, whore or mother.

    • basilisk says:

      Indeed you have forgotten someone: Caterina Sforza. Who was apparently just as badass in real life.

      • Serenegoose says:

        They were more remembering Caterina but forgetting Claudia, but getting the names back to front. Claudia and Ezio don’t bone.

        Actually, the fact that AC2 was quite good on the ladies front was one of the things that bugged me most about AC3-4 which seem to be coming from a totally different direction. Connor’s mother only existed to get fridged, and the AC4 launch and teaser trailers only had women in them as arm candy, which was most demoralising. This won’t fix things entirely, but it’s a step in the right direction, even if it is a sideshow to AC3/4’s sausagefest.

        • basilisk says:

          You are correct, of course. I in turn mixed up Claudia with the fictitious Dürer woman Ezio hooked up with in Revelations, whatever her name was.

          Some historical periods just are more prone to sausagefesting than others, I suppose. The war of independence was a very male thing.

          • Serenegoose says:

            Sophia. Which is almost my name, and so threw me the entire time. Probably why I remember it. :)

    • Ravenholme says:

      Aye, I had to roll my eyes a little at that.

      Didn’t AC 1 have a female Knight Templar too? Who was only pencilled into the “Girlfriend role” in AC2 and it’s follow ups so as to explain how Altair managed to have descendants.

    • Jimbo says:

      This is RPS don’t forget. They’re contractually obliged to make a comment like that in every article.

      • Serenegoose says:

        and the comments thread is obliged to act like the sky is falling, apparently.

        • Boffin says:

          It’s apparently inappropriate to be annoyed when RPS has its social justice articles (since we can just not read that article). And it’s apparently an overreaction to point out that an article about a game has unnecessarily brought up gender when it’s not an issue.

          Saying “Hey, this actually ignores a fair chunk of characters and story” is far from acting like the sky is falling.

  15. noodlecake says:

    Assassin’s Creed III was alright. They actually made the fighting slightly more fun and challenghing (it was always impossible to die before) and the missions were definitely better (you could just summon cronies to kill everyone in stealth missions on Brotherhood onwards). Gameplay wise there were some significant improvements on an already pretty great game. The thing that let it down was how boring Connor was. If Haytham had been the protagonist it would have been great. Also the trading system was stupid and unintuitive. No idea how they managed to release it like that.

  16. akshay says:

    Download Assassin’s Creed III: Liberation HD Save Game for PC from here – link to