Now that I've recruited trainee Assassins from the districts of Boston and New York, liberated all the colonies from Templar control, swept the Atlantic of enemy ships, found Captain Kidd's lost treasure, built up a safe, secluded homestead, and debunked a hunter's wilderness myths; now, I think I've completed AC3 to satisfaction.

Some of the optional content, like the naval battles and Daniel Boone's tall tales, is surprisingly entertaining; while of course some, like collecting a bajillion bird feathers and almanac pages, is pretty menial. As in the franchise's last few installments, there's no shortage of choice in terms of what (if any) extras you decide to throw yourself into.

For the record, I put a little over 20 hours into AC3 doing barely any of these extras, and ended a little under 40 hours, having done the ones I found interesting. So, pretty good longevity on this guy.

Progress: 75% completion

The Assassin's Creed franchise has wandered an uneven path over the past few years: first hewing painfully close to its real-world technobabble, later becoming a pseudo-religious fairy tale; developing a mystery-steeped story around modern-day protagonist Desmond, but largely discarding it as the series proceeded; premising itself on single-minded assassination and stealth, then trading these concepts for visceral melee combat and a bevy of integrated mini-games. AC3, for the most part, continues these traditions -- but rather than coming across as a Frankenstein's monster like its predecessors, this iteration feels somehow right.

One of the biggest changes from previous Creeds to AC3 is, this time, the high-level story structure is actually pretty good. While Desmond's 2012 story is still rooted in absurd conspiratard bullshit, most of the story-telling here avoids the trap of descending into poorly-justified exposition, instead focusing on smaller-scale events and inter-character drama. Some of those characters are criminally underdeveloped (who the fuck is Cross?), and the ending is, of course, a poorly-written and idiotic cliffhanger. But still -- progress.

The 18th century story is a lot better-told than Altair's and Ezio's were, too. It actually doesn't start with Connor (the central Native American protagonist), but with Haytham Kenway, a British assassin on a mission to the colonies. There are some well-plotted twists, and some real, meaningful character interactions throughout his and Connor's campaign; and at times when those feel stale, there is also the exceptionally fascinating - although I may be biased - backdrop of the American revolution. This, too, is paced masterfully, stepping from milestone event to milestone event without ever feeling conveniently contrived (unlike, say, Brotherhood's treatment of the Italian Renaissance).

What's most compelling about AC3's writing is a number of scenes - mostly in the Animus, but occasionally in 2012 as well - that question the franchise's foundations, the motives of Templars and Assassins, and the nature of the human desires for peace and freedom. It's a shame, though, that these motivational and philosophical questions aren't really explored by the game's characters. There's also still plenty of awkwardly-written dialog, and Connor's voice actor is distractingly flat for most of the game. Again, though -- progress.

While the storytelling is what makes AC3's campaign easy to fall into, what keeps it playable is an impressive amount of attention to combat mechanics. Where Altair's stealth was largely driven by his terrible hand-to-hand skills, and Ezio still seemed to regret holding an axe, Connor is a goddamn artist with his tomahawk, painting the battlefield with the blood of his enemies. Combat is fast, and flows beautifully thanks to some Arkham-style enemy behavior, where attacks are counterable, but most enemies are always vulnerable to some weakness. Some enemy-specific tactics are difficult to read due to visually-similar enemy types, and occasionally, the camera will get stuck behind a wall or a tree, hiding counter/block prompts; but for the most part, AC3's combat system works great.

With fast weapons and flowing counters, cutting down hordes of redcoats is a true joy. Which is good, because the other main element of Assassin's Creed gameplay - stealth - hasn't improved much. Actually, with the last few games' new clambering rules and control-system overhauls, it's harder than ever to execute the exact right sequence of events to remain undetected -- and easier than ever to accidentally climb the wrong thing or make the wrong jump. Given that, it's exceptionally regrettable how many campaign missions fail automatically when you're detected (seriously, what the hell, Ubisoft?). But these are tolerable enough to power through.

In fact, between the compelling plot and the fast-paced gameplay, I found it hard to put AC3's campaign down, even for optional, non-campaign content. This is a first in the series for me (with the exception of the original Assassin's Creed, which didn't have enough optional content to even consider). As you might expect based on Ezio's open-world adventures, there's a ton of extra stuff, from letter-carrying and hunting to assassin recruitment and colonial resistance. With the exception of two or three forced naval battle sequences, these extras are never forced upon the player during the campaign, which is nice ... if a bit inconvenient, since some optional content covers really cool stuff, like the Rope Dart weapon and Assassin Recruit powers.

This, at least in my estimation, is less of a design mistake and more of a production misstep. Like Philadelphia, and like some skip-ahead dialog hinting at missing content, there are various indicators throughout the campaign's story of content that was cut, or rearranged for time. And that these seams are still visible, shows that (in accordance with tradition) this game wasn't quite finished. On the one hand, the 2012 plot demands that the game be released before December 21st; but then again, this pattern - changing the game's design and rushing it to release - really seems to be the AC franchise's most persistent flaw. As fun and as enriched as Assassin's Creed 3 is, it still feels, like every other Creed, unfinished.

But in the face of these continuing production issues, AC3 shows -- well, progress. Even in its technical sophistication, which takes some meaningful steps forward from Ezio's stagnating engine: facial expressions look great, crowded city scenes hold up reasonably well, and water and snow look and act excellently. Yeah, there is still the occasional low-resolution texture and low-polygon model mixed in here, but ... progress.

It's been a long journey, but AC3 has finally made something really impressive and fun out of the franchise; even if it wasn't what I expected.

Better than: every previous Assassin's Creed game
Not as good as: Batman: Arkham City
Not a bad place to jump into the series: as long as you don't mind missing the nonsensical First Civilization backstory (which isn't really missing much).

Progress: Finished the campaign

On the heels of an initial shot at Snapshot - expect glogging on this game later - I became anxious to discover more about the studio behind it, Retro Affect (or in this case, just designer Kyle Pulver). Depict1 may not last very long, but it's a clever and engaging jaunt, not to mention an audiovisual treat. It's one of those rare games that ties its core conceit into not only the narrative, but the gameplay itself.

You should try it! (Flash version)

Progress: Complete

Pretentious, shallow, absolutely unsubstantial garbage. The metaphor-story is underdeveloped and underwhelming. The world design is unremarkable, a handful of tepidly interesting landmarks scattered around an otherwise bland landscape. (The narrative is the same way -- barely intriguing when it's happening, but largely vacant.) And interactivity is completely absent: walk along a path.

A waste of money at $2.50, and a waste of time at under an hour. There is nothing of value here.

Progress: Complete

My feelings on Company of Heroes are mixed. On the one hand, its nuanced action mechanics - cover and line of sight, disparate attack types and special abilities - are impressively thought-out, and lend a real sense of personal engagement to combat. On the other hand, these mechanics have rough spots that can really ruin the experience: when units don't move exactly where you told them to, exposing them to enemy fire; when units don't notice that their nearby friends are taking it on the chin, and just stand around helplessly; when units take too long to wind up a special ability, getting shot down before the ability goes off.

I want to give a special call-out to the "pinned down" mechanic - wherein a unit is under so much fire that he can literally do nothing except flee (or, depending on the unit type, use a special ability to break out of it) - as feeling like a complete, 100% mistake. There's nothing more frustrating than sending a surge into the enemy stronghold, and taking the time to pick cover for each unit, only to have them scramble out in the open, cowering, waiting to die.

It's a shame, because the game is really well made for the most part -- the production values, especially the voice work, are excellent as well. If I had any patience at all, I'd probably be glad to put up with the game's annoyances; but the payoff, when the combat mechanics actually come together to your advantage, just doesn't seem worth it.

It doesn't help that this is yet another World War II, Allied invasion of France game. History buffs might get a lot more out of it, but I'm just not that interested in historic troop movements and tactics.

Progress: Gave Up -- Defended Carentan (Normandy campaign)

As tempting as it is to think of Nightmare in North Point as a Hong Kong-flavored Undead Nightmare, that comparison is really unfair to the guys at Rockstar. This DLC pack has about an hour's worth of story missions, and less than another hour of optional side-content. And some collectible shrines, but unlike in the main game, there are no map markers for them -- so who's got the time for that.

Nightmare in North Point mixes up the combat a little, for ghost-busting purposes: your basic Jiang Shi are most easily dispatched with a grapple once stunned, there are Yaoguai demons who only take damage when your Face meter is full (or when you're holding a magic peachwood sword), and sometimes you'll need to toss ghosts into a magic portal to close it. And ... that's it! (Well, there's no police and all civilians are zombies, but that's hardly noteable.)

So the mechanical additions are scant, and the amount of playable content is anemic. If there's a redeeming facet of this DLC, it's the tongue-in-cheek writing: head ghost "Smiley Cat" is frustrated that no one calls him by his real name, and one Yaoguai told me that humans have "fucked-up names." Nightmare in North Point thrives on its parodic B-movie premise, to the extent that it thrives at all.

If you liked Sleeping Dogs, this is a little (very little) more of it. But that's the best endorsement I can really give. You're not missing anything by skipping it.

Better than: Red Faction: Armageddon - Path to War
Not as good as: Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare
Seriously, less than two hours to completion: considering the original game's value proposition, that's pretty disappointing.

Progress: Finished the story missions, closed the portals

A more thorough, and multi-player, sit-down with Nintendo Land has brought me to a simple conclusion: the Luigi's Ghost Mansion game is the only one worth playing again.

None of the solo experiences - or multi-player turn-taking affairs - can hold anyone's interest after one or two tries. Admittedly, I didn't do the multi-player modes of Metroid Blast and Zelda Battle Quest, because they both require a bunch of extra equipment we didn't have on-hand (which is as good as a disqualification). Pikmin Adventure is just dreadfully boring. Mario Chase is too difficult to navigate to be fun, and the Animal Crossing fruit-collection game is ... okay, but poorly balanced: winning as the fruit collectors is almost impossible, and it only becomes less possible with more players.

Luigi's Ghost Mansion, a sort-of reverse Pac-man, pits one "ghost" player - invisible except in special circumstances - against some Luigi-alikes with ghostbusting flashlights in a maze-like arena. A hunter's Wii remote will rumble when the ghost is near, but the hunter doesn't necessarily know from what direction the ghost is coming -- which the ghost can exploit to great dramatic effect, legitimately haunting a player. And hunters which are downed can be revived with enough flashlight power, but replacement batteries are difficult to come by. Honestly, this game in itself can keep a party going for some time.

It's a shame that the rest of the package is mediocre at best.

Better than: Wii Play
Not as good as: Wii Sports
Keep in mind, for multi-player: you'll need to supplement the Wii U's equipment set with Wii Remotes, and more in some games (Motion Pluses and/or Nunchuks).

Progress: Gave Up -- Played a little of everything

Unfortunately, none of Dishonored's subsequent missions had nearly as many optional side-objectives as the first. Actually, the most disappointing thing as the game went forward (and eventually ended) was how shallow the effects of these and other choices were: usually limited to a line or two of dialog, or a bonus item when doing a favor for someone. Even the game's most dramatic choice - the amount of "chaos" you create (leaving things alive or killing them instead) - only changes the static scenes and voice-over of a brief ending sequence. So, it's actually harder than I expected to justify playing through the game more than once.

That being said, the gameplay that gets you to that ending is pretty top-notch; so if you can't enjoy it for the personalized consequences, you can at least enjoy the sneaking and assassinating for its own sake. Dishonored's levels are imaginatively and intricately crafted, with plenty of routes between you and your objective. Blink up the side of a building and sneak in a window? Possess a rat (or a guard) and find a secret route to a safe hiding spot? Stock up on potions and ammo, and storm the front door? Well, the latter option is usually unreasonably difficult, but otherwise the level of freedom is refreshing.

Dishonored's levels consistently feel like wide open worlds to explore and exploit as you see fit. (Actually, another of my complaints is that too many collectibles - runes and charms for special powers, and item/money caches - are way, way far off the beaten path.) Every blocked door, guarded hall, and swarm of enemies is a puzzle with multiple solutions, an opportunity to try new approaches and discover more about how the game works.

The story and setting is pretty good, too, aside from some uneven voice acting -- particularly Piero, who sounds like he's channeling the lowlights of PlayStation 1-era voicework. And despite a genuinely cool twist, the final levels can feel like they're dragging on a bit too long. But -- don't let my constant descent into gripes distract you from what is, overall, a fantastically entertaining and compelling game. It's imperfect, but there's plenty of good stuff in here.

Better than: BioShock 2
Not as good as: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Maybe as good as: BioShock, Batman: Arkham Asylum

Progress: Finished with high chaos

Dishonored has some admirable shooting, sneaking, stabbing, platforming, magicking, and even level-upping mechanics, providing some really amazing degrees of freedom in its assassination missions. But it isn't just that there are so many options -- what's amazing about Dishonored is that so many of those options are good.

Frequently in this kind of open-ended action game - like Deus Ex: Human Revolution, for example - there end up being two or three golden paths through each scenario, which is cool, but clearly distinct from a true sense of agency. With the elaborate nuances of its level design, the meaningful differentiations in magic upgrades, the number and variety of optional side-missions, and the viability of combining and mixing-up approach techniques on a whim, Dishonored can actually play more like Skyrim than your every-day stealth action game.

There are shades of other games in here, too: as in BioShock, there are plenty of ambient objects to find and read, unraveling more of the game world's backstory; not unlike Batman's recent game outings, your character can't take too many direct hits before eating it, but you can use the environment to escape in a pinch. And these influences only contribute further to Dishonored's incredible sense of depth and variety. I feel like Dishonored might be the first game in a long time that I actually play through more than once, just to try playing through it a different way.

Of course, I say this having only, thus far, finished the game's first major assassination (and having only scratched the surface of its magic powers). Who knows where the rest of the game will take me?

Progress: Dealt with High Overseer Campbell

The Armageddon DLC adds a new game mode to Warlock, which turns some seemingly simple mechanical alterations into a dramatically different campaign experience. While a normal campaign plays primarily against other Great Mages with the unwelcome interference of monsters, an Armageddon campaign gives the monsters (and landscape) enough power to flip that balance around.

Rival mages are barely a concern, as Dremer invasions randomly spring up, infecting the landscape (which reduces all of your resource income), and even destroying a city instantly if you're unfortunate enough. Not to mention the random appearance of volcanoes. The default win condition in Armageddon isn't victory over your rivals at all, but to defeat the Dremer invaders at their source.

It's an interesting mixup, but even though fighting monsters was one of my favorite aspects of the normal campaign, I found Armageddon's Dremer to be a bit too much. It was all I could do to fight off random spawns before new ones came in; my empire developed so slowly, that I had to rely on hero units to do basically anything, and never really made any headway in exploring the world to find the Dremer's anchors or whatever.

More so than Warlock's regular mode, Armageddon is let down by imbalance. Maybe some future patches will make the mode more palatable, but until then, the absurd, destructive difficulty doesn't seem worth putting up with.

Better than: a lot of other crappy DLC that just adds items no one really wants.
Not as good as: Warlock: Master of the Arcane
At least it's super-cheap: and adds some new Great Mages to the regular game, too.

Progress: Gave Up -- Built a basic empire, but keep getting warlock-blocked by Dremer