Assassin's Creed III and the Aesthetics of Disappointment

Key insights

7 takeaways

01
The paper argues that an "aesthetics of disappointment" lets players measure Assassin's Creed III against the series' past and against expectations for gaming's future, with disappointment depending on prior expectations shaped by paratexts such as leaked box art, previews, and developer interviews.
02
Based on qualitative close reading of user reviews and forum threads from June 2012 through January 2013 on sites like Giantbomb, IGN, Destructoid, and Polygon, rather than a formal survey or sample.
03
Critics targeted the game's level design, controls, technical glitches, narrative, and ending, often comparing it with Revelations, Dishonored, Far Cry 3, and Mass Effect 3, while others defended its naval combat and story.
04
Despite commercial success, with over 7 million copies sold during the 2012 holiday season and 14 million units reported at the time of writing, the game was widely framed as a letdown, and a patch addressing a criticized chase sequence did not resolve the discontent.
05
The authors contend that disappointment is productive because it sustains discussion without consensus, keeping games circulating as cultural artifacts beyond play sessions.
06
The paper describes this participation as "paidiaic" play that accumulates "gaming capital," which is needed to articulate what went wrong with a game.
07
The authors frame this activity within a commercially managed, neoliberal archive of gaming paratexts shaped by market interests and the spreadability of online media.

Summary

This paper examines how video game players construct a "culture of history" around Assassin's Creed III through prerelease, release, and post-release commentary, drawing mainly on user reviews and forum discussions on gaming enthusiast press websites such as Giantbomb.com, IGN.com, Destructoid.com, and Polygon.com. The authors' central argument is that an "aesthetics of disappointment" generates a comparative sense of the gaming present by measuring the game against the series' past and against expectations for the future of gaming. The data cover June 2012 through January 2013, centered on the buildup from the E3 2012 expo through the holiday release window. The analysis is qualitative and rests on close reading of selected posts and discussion threads, supplemented by the authors' longer-term engagement with gaming press as an ethnographic-style archival practice, rather than on a formal survey or sample.

The authors find that disappointment depends on prior expectations shaped by paratextual materials such as leaked box art, previews, and developer interviews, and that it requires accumulated "gaming capital" to articulate what went wrong. Commenters criticized the game's level design, controls, technical glitches, narrative, and ending, often comparing it with Revelations, Dishonored, Far Cry 3, and Mass Effect 3, while others defended its naval combat and narrative. Despite its commercial success, with over 7 million copies sold during the 2012 holiday season and 14 million units reported by the paper's writing, the game was widely framed as a letdown, and even a patch addressing a criticized chase sequence did not resolve the discontent.

The paper concludes that disappointment is productive because it sustains discussion without reaching consensus, thereby keeping games circulating as cultural artifacts beyond their play sessions. The authors describe this participation as "paidiaic" play that accumulates gaming capital within a commercially managed, neoliberal archive of gaming paratexts, one that is shaped by market interests and the spreadability of online media.