2. The Historical Side
Ignore point four for a moment. A common complaint about AC3 was that the buildings didn't have quite the same scale as they did within the Ezio trilogy, and Ubisoft should have added more. Sure, and while they're at it, how's about they add the sphinx and Buckingham Palace? Did no one ever consider that fact that they couldn't add all of these things? Ubisoft went accurately for what was the norm at the time; standard, uniform, rather basic buildings. Personally I think it was a brave move by Ubi to go to the US, as they would have to stray from the traditional styling of the buildings in favour of what was then modern. Also, I remember seeing an article about the game that compared Connor to Forrest Gump, in that he always just wound up in the more important parts of the revolution. While I see where they were coming from, that was the bloody point. Connor
intentionally went to these events, and it's not like he went across the continent searching for trouble, he was only present on the Eastern coast (except for his brief guest role in Assassin's Creed III: Liberation).