PDA

View Full Version : Assassinscreed: Brotherhood Splitscreen?



Chasebreaker
08-01-2010, 04:00 PM
Is Assassins Creed Brotherhood going to have any offline or splitscreen multiplay on the console verisions? Since Ubisoft haven´t released an offical answer to the question except the exclusion of co-op it appears to still be up in the air.

I for one thinks that Splitscreen would be THE key feature for Brotherhood since alot of people out there seems to be asking for it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif.

However there is of course others who thinks it would ruin the entire game?

Personally i dont think it would ruin the game by dividing the screen into two or four smaller ones, Halo for one example is a fourplayer splitscreen shooter, also with a fourplayer splitscreen Online, and it´s the bestselling game on Xbox 360 with around 8 million copies in contrast to Battlefield Bad Companys 5 million who only offered singleplayer online multiplay http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

So you guys, i think that offline multiplayer would make Assassins Creed: Brotherhood a MUCH better game so voice your opinions 'cause the developers read the forums.

SBRedFlag
08-01-2010, 04:23 PM
Actually they have officially said that there will be no coop in ACB: http://www.co-optimus.com/arti...s-not-co-op-yet.html (http://www.co-optimus.com/article/4171/assassin-s-creed-brotherhood-looks-co-op-is-not-co-op-yet.html)

primerib69
08-01-2010, 05:10 PM
Welcome to the forums Chasebreaker! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Oatkeeper
08-02-2010, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
Personally i dont think it would ruin the game by dividing the screen into two or four smaller ones, Halo for one example is a fourplayer splitscreen shooter, also with a fourplayer splitscreen Online, and it´s the bestselling game on Xbox 360 with around 8 million copies in contrast to Battlefield Bad Companys 5 million who only offered singleplayer online multiplay http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

I dont mean to sound mean but , did you even think that sentence though. Comparing Halo's multiplayer and Assassins Creeds it pointless, particularly when considering the idea of split screen.

The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.

now if we talk connecting systems thats an entirely different matter, becuase it allows offline playy without the worry of screen looking

primerib69
08-02-2010, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
Personally i dont think it would ruin the game by dividing the screen into two or four smaller ones, Halo for one example is a fourplayer splitscreen shooter, also with a fourplayer splitscreen Online, and it´s the bestselling game on Xbox 360 with around 8 million copies in contrast to Battlefield Bad Companys 5 million who only offered singleplayer online multiplay http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

I dont mean to sound mean but , did you even think that sentence though. Comparing Halo's multiplayer and Assassins Creeds it pointless, particularly when considering the idea of split screen.

The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.

now if we talk connecting systems thats an entirely different matter, becuase it allows offline playy without the worry of screen looking </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Also if you have a small tv it really, really, blows. But if you have a flat screen, then I wouldn't be too worried. The only problem is screen peaking, but for those people who played Goldeneye 64 back in the day (erday erday)....

Papa_Cheesy
08-02-2010, 09:57 AM
I for one definetly agree with this splitscreen situation theres lots of people out there who only have one xbox and one game but two controllers ubisoft could make alot more money if they make it splitscreen. therfore the people that have a brother or some other sibling they could play with them on that game. Assassins creed could become a even bigger sucsess IF they made it splitscreen. so lets hope they do cause it WILL NOT RUIN the game. I rest my case.

TheEpicWolf
08-02-2010, 10:04 AM
There's apparently a new thing that works kinda like 3D does, you wear glasses and there's a flashing image on the screen(i'm guessing it's of both players screens) and when you wear the glasses it only shows you one screen meaning both player would play full screen on only one screen.
I'm not sure exactly what it is it just remember hearing about it on Sarcastic Gamer Playstation Podcast http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

SBRedFlag
08-02-2010, 10:55 AM
That would require buying a new, more expensive than average, TV, and the glasses. Maybe in 5-10 years something like that will be feasible, but definitely not for ACB.

Riley_Dom
08-02-2010, 11:04 AM
The main problem with co-op would be screen peaking. (at least IMO.)

Chasebreaker
08-02-2010, 11:13 AM
Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
Personally i dont think it would ruin the game by dividing the screen into two or four smaller ones, Halo for one example is a fourplayer splitscreen shooter, also with a fourplayer splitscreen Online, and it´s the bestselling game on Xbox 360 with around 8 million copies in contrast to Battlefield Bad Companys 5 million who only offered singleplayer online multiplay http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

I dont mean to sound mean but , did you even think that sentence though. Comparing Halo's multiplayer and Assassins Creeds it pointless, particularly when considering the idea of split screen.

The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.

now if we talk connecting systems thats an entirely different matter, becuase it allows offline playy without the worry of screen looking </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you that it indeed would be more vital to screenlook in the Brotherhood multiplayer than an Fps such as Halo, but then again when i play splitscreen with my friends i honestly dont care that much if they would screenpeak or what not. After all im just trying to have fun with my friends, and if alot of sneakpeaking would make the game insufferable, then we would stop. When me and my bros starts gaming the whole fun aspect is more important than the point of winning http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

SBRedFlag
08-02-2010, 11:52 AM
That's undeniably true. But I think the goal of the developers is to deliver the full experience, and make sure that nothing takes away from that experience. Screenlooking does take away from the experience, and that presents a problem for offline multiplayer. Not only that, but it's just not justifiable, storywise.

Oatkeeper
08-02-2010, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by sbredflag:
That's undeniably true. But I think the goal of the developers is to deliver the full experience, and make sure that nothing takes away from that experience. Screenlooking does take away from the experience, and that presents a problem for offline multiplayer. Not only that, but it's just not justifiable, storywise. I forgot about that, split screen is not at all justifiable story wise.

Chasebreaker
08-02-2010, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by sbredflag:
That's undeniably true. But I think the goal of the developers is to deliver the full experience, and make sure that nothing takes away from that experience. Screenlooking does take away from the experience, and that presents a problem for offline multiplayer. Not only that, but it's just not justifiable, storywise. I forgot about that, split screen is not at all justifiable story wise. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And leap of faith is justifiable?
And what about all the benches in the whole game only has two people sitting on them? And Ezio is the only man on Earth who learned the sorcerous art of swimming? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
I mean Ubisoft has already bent the story a little and Splitscreen would make the game far more sucessful than the mystical benches of Italy and the supersoft haystacks of awesome http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Fairus60
08-02-2010, 02:52 PM
Of course it can be justified. use the same idea for the ACB multiplayer. The splitscreen can simply be ignored story-wise. It works exactly the same. Each player is a templar agent in training and thats it.

primerib69
08-02-2010, 03:02 PM
maybe splitscreen should just be an available option that you can turn on/off in the settings menu. Just throw it in there for giggles, and let the gamers decide if they like it or not.

bokeef04
08-02-2010, 05:22 PM
i laugh when people say co-op is not justifiable, can't the templar's work together? and whether it is split screen or not can be left to the players discretion, or are the characters going to start breaking the 4th wall (http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20070720) now?

i seriously see no problems with them enabling
-online MP/Co-op
-LAN MP/Co-op
-offline, split-screen MP/Co-op

and all justifiable, i'm not asking for Ubisoft to make the whole SP Co-op but maybe make a Co-op MP mode and the SP assassination missions available as a seperate Co-op menu(not related to SP at all) that is unlocked after completing the assassination in the SP campaign

kashtrey
08-02-2010, 06:14 PM
Split screen is easily justifiable both storywise and development wise. There is no real reason to exclude it.

Story Wise - It would be easy to say that the TV is really a monitoring device used by the person training the Templars viewing all of their activities at once with each play still controlling their own avatar.

Development - Yes, the issue of screen looking would be a major complaint but the fact is I think most people would appreciate having the option to play with their friends at home. If my friend cheats I'll not ask them to play with me simple as that. There is no reason to not include a feature that would be very fun for the few people that would make it suck. If you have cheating friends don't let them play simple as that.

Fairus60
08-02-2010, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by kashtrey:
Split screen is easily justifiable both storywise and development wise. There is no real reason to exclude it.

Story Wise - It would be easy to say that the TV is really a monitoring device used by the person training the Templars viewing all of their activities at once with each play still controlling their own avatar.

Development - Yes, the issue of screen looking would be a major complaint but the fact is I think most people would appreciate having the option to play with their friends at home. If my friend cheats I'll not ask them to play with me simple as that. There is no reason to not include a feature that would be very fun for the few people that would make it suck. If you have cheating friends don't let them play simple as that.
dude, you just explainde what I tried to say. Thanks

primerib69
08-02-2010, 08:01 PM
We're all bros here brahhh

Oatkeeper
08-02-2010, 10:58 PM
Originally posted by kashtrey:
Split screen is easily justifiable both storywise and development wise. There is no real reason to exclude it.

Story Wise - It would be easy to say that the TV is really a monitoring device used by the person training the Templars viewing all of their activities at once with each play still controlling their own avatar.

Development - Yes, the issue of screen looking would be a major complaint but the fact is I think most people would appreciate having the option to play with their friends at home. If my friend cheats I'll not ask them to play with me simple as that. There is no reason to not include a feature that would be very fun for the few people that would make it suck. If you have cheating friends don't let them play simple as that.

while I appreciate your theory for story justification, because it does technicaly work. It just sounds to me like that breaks the immersion to me. The idea is that we are each in our own animus in a training sequence, being able to see another players screen means that you are no longer within your own mind, but on the screen. Your idea works, but it sacrifices a bit of immersion that the games have went though a lot of effort to keep (such as naming life bars "syncronization", and not "health" or "armor integrity")

if we where talking co-op I would prolly be more for the idea of split screen, it still has a the justification issue, but it does not have an issue with gameplay since screen looking/peaking would not effect either players chances of winning (since its not competitive)

tyrce111
08-02-2010, 11:26 PM
Having the option to replay singleplayer assassinations after youve compleated the game would be awesome...
Imagine the gameplay...
You wouldnt have to use a laggy internet connection to suss out the aproach...

You could just speak to eachother normaly..

"Okay you distract the guards and Ill stab him in the back!!"

Wanted gameplay and other MP game modes would be sort of stupid due to screenign but if UBI were to make online race modes with the flying machine, horses, chariots, and horse powered carts, it would be cool to have splitscreen to race a brother or a friend...

so splitscreen should have limited game modes to prevent the opportunity to screen and mot actualy use any skill...

EzioAssassin51
08-03-2010, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by Oatkeeper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kashtrey:
Split screen is easily justifiable both storywise and development wise. There is no real reason to exclude it.

Story Wise - It would be easy to say that the TV is really a monitoring device used by the person training the Templars viewing all of their activities at once with each play still controlling their own avatar.

Development - Yes, the issue of screen looking would be a major complaint but the fact is I think most people would appreciate having the option to play with their friends at home. If my friend cheats I'll not ask them to play with me simple as that. There is no reason to not include a feature that would be very fun for the few people that would make it suck. If you have cheating friends don't let them play simple as that.

while I appreciate your theory for story justification, because it does technicaly work. It just sounds to me like that breaks the immersion to me. The idea is that we are each in our own animus in a training sequence, being able to see another players screen means that you are no longer within your own mind, but on the screen. Your idea works, but it sacrifices a bit of immersion that the games have went though a lot of effort to keep (such as naming life bars "syncronization", and not "health" or "armor integrity")

if we where talking co-op I would prolly be more for the idea of split screen, it still has a the justification issue, but it does not have an issue with gameplay since screen looking/peaking would not effect either players chances of winning (since its not competitive) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the most story-based Co-Op we can have is in AC3! If we go around with the four assassin's fighting the templars and stuff, we can have a Left 4 Dead 2 sort of thing! I made a thread about it, somewhere on the second or thrid page!

primerib69
08-03-2010, 01:01 AM
Then it would be a true brotherhood

Chasebreaker
08-03-2010, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by primerib69:
Then it would be a true brotherhood

I agree mate, the whole story that could be filled with co-op awesomeness is more a management game were instead of actually playing the game with friends you send out Npcs to do the gaming for you http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

tyrce111
08-04-2010, 07:36 AM
Chasebreaker I love your name!!!

It rings a bell but I dont know wear I have heard it before...jk

Welcome to the forums...

fun1-fun2_me
08-04-2010, 09:47 AM
The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.



Personally, I think that split screen would be more challenging than online. Sure online, you don't know where they are but when you play with the person in your house they may screen sneak and you do too, so you never know who will strike first. Then wat it really comes down to is what will the guy your hunting do if he screen sneaks.

SBRedFlag
08-04-2010, 09:58 AM
Well here's another thing: Would the two people playing against each other only target each other, since there's no one else to target? That would become boring fast, don't you think?

Chasebreaker
08-04-2010, 12:59 PM
That's why we must demand 4 player splitscreen + 8 player system link to make the game the best multiplayer on the market http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif!
In addition to that they could implement the Halo concept with 4 player splitscreen online wich indeed would be totally awesome.

I mean be restricted to only singleplaying online gaming would limit the multiplaying portion of the game since not everyone have their Ps3/Xbox hooked up or does not have a Xbox gold membership. Those people are essentially buying only half of the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif.

It's similar to Crackdown 2 who have also <span class="ev_code_RED">only</span> incorporated <span class="ev_code_RED">online</span> multiplaying which has lead to dimished sales and mediocre reviews despite how good the game could have been with an entire co-op story but it is sadly only accessible online http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Chasebreaker
08-04-2010, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by tyrce111:
Chasebreaker I love your name!!!

It rings a bell but I dont know wear I have heard it before...jk

Welcome to the forums...

Thank you buddy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

I love my name too! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

CherokeeInferno
08-04-2010, 06:39 PM
My friend and I loved playing the SCC co-op mode, and I think that since there is a brotherhood in ACB, that a second player can play as another assassin, maybe not in all the levels, but in levels concerning the brotherhood. Also, a local 4-player hunter or whatever kind of mode would be fun b/c when 4 friends are playing each other, no one really cares about screen cheating.

Chasebreaker
08-05-2010, 11:56 AM
I just wish upon a little star that the good folks down at Ubisoft Montreal could find it in their hearts to atleast release a co-op DLC apart from the main story like SPCC http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

primerib69
08-05-2010, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
I just wish upon a little star that the good folks down at Ubisoft Montreal could find it in their hearts to atleast release a co-op DLC apart from the main story like SPCC http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Yeah that sounds great! There are so many possibilities for the DLC! Look at Mass Effect 2 DLC. They didn't have any vehicle gameplay in the actual game, but in the DLC they put it in and it worked out great!

Chasebreaker
08-06-2010, 03:11 PM
I wonder what Assassins Creed could lose on inplementing offline/online splitscreen.

It seems to me that it would only be more popular but since other multiplayer titles have chosen to exclude splitscreen often to reduced sales, they must have some reason, right?

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 12:39 PM
I think there should be split screen because people who dont have internet cant play multiplayer. your only going to lose customers by not including split screen. I think it a necissary inclusion.

SBRedFlag
08-23-2010, 12:40 PM
I don't get it... Most households have internet nowadays, don't you think Tyrone?

mikeh1294
08-23-2010, 12:44 PM
One of the main problems with splitscreen is the graphics. Some of the machines it runs on (not mentioning specifics, so as not to start a console war) can't handle rendering two detailed images one one screen.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by sbredflag:
I don't get it... Most households have internet nowadays, don't you think Tyrone?
Well most do but my friends only has wi-fi where his garage. (where his dad works.) Also for the people who dont you online a lot (me). it would be nice to play with your friends if they came over so you dont have to send them back to thier house to play.

SBRedFlag
08-23-2010, 01:00 PM
You don't need wifi, you can easily connect your console to the internet with a cable. And I just don't see how splitscreen could work due to technical reasons (as mikini said) and gameplay reasons (no stealth is involved in splitscreen).

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by sbredflag:
You don't need wifi, you can easily connect your console to the internet with a cable. And I just don't see how splitscreen could work due to technical reasons (as mikini said) and gameplay reasons (no stealth is involved in splitscreen). that is a good point. I did that with a computer in my basement. Well it isn't impossible to get split screen to work on both consoles and I really don't care if the graphics suffer a bit. As other people have said before "if people are screen cheating just stop" plus there are other game modes besides wanted. some of them involving less stealth than another.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 01:23 PM
I like your quotes on the bottom of the page.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 01:44 PM
I don't see why people are opposed to ACB split screen. If you don't want it, don't use it!

SBRedFlag
08-23-2010, 01:49 PM
No one here is probably actively opposed to it (I could be wrong, if you actually would die if they included splitscreen, let me know). It's just that a lot of us doubt the feasibility of it.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 02:00 PM
Haha. The thing is that if I don't get split screen I real won't play multiplayer. I'm just crossing my fingers for it! I don't see why (no offense) people keep saying how it's not gonna work. I'm not a video game expert but I don't see why it's so in-plausible. (is that a word?)

SBRedFlag
08-23-2010, 02:12 PM
implausible is the word you're looking for.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 02:33 PM
Haha right. But I still don't see why people think it is implausible.

IceScream777
08-23-2010, 03:23 PM
The possibility is there. But is the time there? I think that the developers would need more time before the release to create a functioning multiplayer platform. I'm not downing the idea of splitscreen, but i wouldn't expect it too soon. I agree that it would also push the consoles to there limit. But thats what being done with other games. FFXIII Pushed the graphics boundary. Bottom line for me is that im gonna play the game regardless. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 03:40 PM
Yeah, I'll get it anyway. I have actually preordered it. The ubisoft team has been working on multiplayer for a really long time. They have been working on it since the first assassins creed but there wasn't the technology or a good way to implement it. So I think there should be enough tech for it and I think it's necessary for any multiplayer. (that's my opinion)

Caligula__
08-23-2010, 03:44 PM
UBISOFT

Splitscreen won't hurt anyone, players have an option. Play splitscreen or just scroll over it or not scroll down that far

BUT!

Lots of people do want it so yeah... why not make it? it'll mean you have more fans http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif and more moneyyyyyy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Vx_McTavish_xV:
UBISOFT

Splitscreen won't hurt anyone, players have an option. Play splitscreen or just scroll over it or not scroll down that far

BUT!

Lots of people do want it so yeah... why not make it? it'll mean you have more fans http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif and more moneyyyyyy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif true dat! If you don't want it don't use it!

mikeh1294
08-23-2010, 04:30 PM
This has already been said, but; they probably won't include it for technical reasons, not for lack of trying.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 04:42 PM
I think that they can do it. At least two player split screen.

primerib69
08-23-2010, 06:05 PM
128 player split screen is win.


I agree that they should put in split screen in as an option, but they would need a pretty big percentage of AC players to actually implement it. Think of all the people who aren't on the forums (either they don't know about it, or are just old school gamers). We aren't the only ones around.

TYRONe19972000d
08-23-2010, 06:25 PM
First I just want to say a like your quote, it's funny. Also I think if they added split screen everyone will use it at least 2 or 3 times. I think there is a large enough amount of people who want it.

IceScream777
08-24-2010, 02:07 PM
So i think everyone is on the same page... The multiplayer is a must

TYRONe19972000d
08-25-2010, 08:20 AM
Originally posted by IceScream777:
So i think everyone is on the same page... The multiplayer is a must Yeah, the split screen multiplayer is a must. We need some good split screen games that aren't shooters.

Chasebreaker
08-27-2010, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by IceScream777:
So i think everyone is on the same page... The multiplayer is a must Yeah, the split screen multiplayer is a must. We need some good split screen games that aren't shooters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Agreed! But i do hope they implement 4 player splitscreen, only 2 player splitscreen would be so much better than online play only, but i personally would prefer 4 player split screen so that the Wanted mode would work better http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Caligula__
08-27-2010, 05:30 PM
yeah... Wanted wouldn't really work, I was thinking like Spec Ops AC style, just some extra missions you can play with up to 3 other friends (or just one other person) and like you've all got a similar objective (Take down all Borgia Towers in x minutes) or maybe horse races...

Online wouldn't really work cause you'd need a large amount of ppl to make it fun

primerib69
08-27-2010, 05:35 PM
or like you have to kill one of the borgia leaders, but you cant alert anybody

Caligula__
08-27-2010, 05:38 PM
Ninja powerrrrrrrr! Hot potato but with horses would be funny as!

one person at a time enters an arena full of guards on horses but you're not allowed to touch the ground and not allowed to stay on your horse for more than 3-6 seconds (there's a timer) so you've gotta jump off and assassinate the guards to get their horses http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif who can last the longest?

TYRONe19972000d
08-30-2010, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Vx_McTavish_xV:
yeah... Wanted wouldn't really work, I was thinking like Spec Ops AC style, just some extra missions you can play with up to 3 other friends (or just one other person) and like you've all got a similar objective (Take down all Borgia Towers in x minutes) or maybe horse races...
Oh yeah! thats sounds fun! also the split screen wouldnt work that well for wanted so it could be certain games that are split screen.
Online wouldn't really work cause you'd need a large amount of ppl to make it fun Thats a good idea! I dont mean to burst your bubble (I know that sounds gay)but ubisoft said there was no co-op. It might include that. But i dont know.

Chasebreaker
08-30-2010, 01:28 PM
I dont know if I speak for the lot of us but I for one thinks that the multplayer would be of little or no worth without the offline component.


I mean it shows a big difference in rating and sales considering games that has tried "secluded online multiplay only". Bioshock 2 is a good example for an awesome game with an awesome singleplayer experience, where the only option is 1 player online, and honestly how many of you guys are online playing that one?

Same thing for Battlefield Bad Company 2, it's succesful enough i guess but it will never top the sales of Call of Duty MW2.


With that said I as everyone else love Assassin's Creed and it's universe with all the single player goodness it brings, but the multiplayer part that seems the most interesting will be worthless to me and certianly to other casual players whose voices might not reach the forums in the same way more hardcore players do.


So in short Ubisoft has nothing to lose including offline splitscreen wich makes the game more appealing for the casual audience.

TYRONe19972000d
08-31-2010, 07:15 AM
That's what I've been trying to say! But I haven't been using big words and a bunch of comparisons. Your completely right. I think the game would be more appealing if it had split screen.

Chasebreaker
08-31-2010, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
That's what I've been trying to say! But I haven't been using big words and a bunch of comparisons. Your completely right. I think the game would be more appealing if it had split screen.

I just hope the developers notices the opinions of us and take them to heart, or perhaps a sign that they have atleast seen it, if for example Mr Shade or Black Widow9 confirms that a developer or something has read the threads and looked at the poll http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Black_Widow9
08-31-2010, 03:36 PM
Let me see what I can find out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

TYRONe19972000d
09-02-2010, 09:16 AM
The devolopers would (hopefully) have enough time to create, if they havent already, split screen before the release in november. So i hope that this is helping to covence the devs to do it.

Chasebreaker
09-02-2010, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
Let me see what I can find out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


Thank you so muchhttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif!

TYRONe19972000d
09-11-2010, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by Black_Widow9:
Let me see what I can find out. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Did you find out anything yet?

LaCava1
09-11-2010, 07:30 AM
I think splitscreen would be fine, but only on one condition... It wouldn't be versus. Everyone would screen peek. It would have to be something like player 1=Ezio and player 2=A recruited Assassin and you do missions together.

FrankieSatt
09-11-2010, 08:02 AM
I would LOVE to have a split screen co-op. They did it with Splinter Cell Conviction.

Co-Op mode in AC would be awesome. You could both play as recruits on a mission that Ezio sends you on.

Chasebreaker
09-12-2010, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by FrankieSatt:
I would LOVE to have a split screen co-op. They did it with Splinter Cell Conviction.

Co-Op mode in AC would be awesome. You could both play as recruits on a mission that Ezio sends you on.

Too bad they say they wont do co-op, until AC3 that is, but the new alliance mode looks promising enoughhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hopefully they´ll include co-op missons in a DLC or something, but for now i'll be content to stab my friends in the comfort of my home without having to use the internet to assassinate them ;D

TribeRucoo
09-14-2010, 10:29 PM
I think a 2-player split screen would be fine playing online, because there are 6 other players that the 2 people can be going after. If by chance your target is your friend on the other half of the screen, then you might have an easy kill, but then again, he might see you're after him and get a head start.

On second thought, maybe they should do split screen but not allow each other be a target, so nobody would have to worry about screen peeking.

Chasebreaker
09-15-2010, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by tris10_99:
I think a 2-player split screen would be fine playing online, because there are 6 other players that the 2 people can be going after. If by chance your target is your friend on the other half of the screen, then you might have an easy kill, but then again, he might see you're after him and get a head start.

On second thought, maybe they should do split screen but not allow each other be a target, so nobody would have to worry about screen peeking.


I think that also should work with 4 player splitscreen online, which would be awesome. True then screenpeeking would sometimes be possible for the cheaters out there, but it has been done before with Halo3 and now with Halo Reach http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Chasebreaker
10-02-2010, 04:31 AM
New info from the xbox live side recently arrived on the xbox AC:B page where on the multiplayer side it says: "3-28 online players".

I at first thought this was the final nail in the coffin for splitscreen, but they havent released any number of offline players so it could still happen http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

And besides, we now know that it's possible to play the multiplayer with only 3 or more players which could imply for 4-player offline splitscreen http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif?

faka-me
10-02-2010, 05:03 PM
i recon that acb could have a split screen thing going. e.g. like COD6 with alfa, beta, charlie etc missions. acb could have assassination contracts to do with 2 players or 4.

blacktiger00
10-02-2010, 08:00 PM
Split screen is a pain when its vs cause of the whole screen looking arguement but for something like Alliance mode where you are on the same team it might actually come in handy. Besides we don't even know what other modes there are yet so maybe there will still be an option. Split screen should never appear in the AC story though. EVER.

Chasebreaker
10-03-2010, 11:48 AM
Originally posted by blacktiger00:
Split screen is a pain when its vs cause of the whole screen looking arguement but for something like Alliance mode where you are on the same team it might actually come in handy. Besides we don't even know what other modes there are yet so maybe there will still be an option. Split screen should never appear in the AC story though. EVER.


Well they have confirmed they might wana include co-op, but being more than one in the animus in one memory in the animus is not "explainable", but then again when they make a game in the modern day we´ll maybe even have 4 player split-screen co-op with Desmond Lucy Rebecca and Shaun, or maybe even subject 16 hehe http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


I´d reckon it will be in AC3 because the rumor of Patrice Déstilets took his "creative break" because the franchise veered away from the trilogy with brotherhood, So in AC3 we´ll presumably be in the modern era.



Conspiring enough for the Assassin's Creed lore fans out there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif?

Mad_Fox84
10-03-2010, 02:12 PM
Having split screen is a crazy idea tbh. Assassins creed Brotherhood multiplayer is completely different to any COD or Halo. It relies heavily on hiding from your pursuer. It would ruin it if your mate could see exactly where you are.

RangerRico
10-03-2010, 10:14 PM
Splitscreen could work for story mode where the additional people are members of the brotherhood. It dosent even have to be part of the story mode.You could just load members of the brotherhood from your story mode profile(multiple people could be the same person) and run around rome, fight gaurds,and do side missions, and have no effect to the story mode incase you die.It could also work like COD where there are seperate profiles and you level up your recruit just for split screen purposes(this would also not be part of the story mode)

AC-FANBOY
10-04-2010, 05:05 AM
Splitscreen can work. For campaign.

One of you can be Ezio(Player 1) and the other is the Assassin recruit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Stevens_2k9
10-04-2010, 07:54 AM
Splitscreen would be cool, so I could assassinate my brother lolz.

Chasebreaker
10-04-2010, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by MaStA20:
Having split screen is a crazy idea tbh. Assassins creed Brotherhood multiplayer is completely different to any COD or Halo. It relies heavily on hiding from your pursuer. It would ruin it if your mate could see exactly where you are.



You could asume so, but Ubisoft has already released a stealth-based versus game with SplinterCell Conviction with splitscreen.
There actually is a mode called duel i think, where you hide from your opponent assassinating both npcs as well as your target.

I have played hours and hours of it, and so far i've never screenlooked and neither my buddies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

eoj19
10-05-2010, 01:20 AM
I'm with ya on that, Chasebreaker. Ubi, please allow offline multiplayer modes! You won't believe how beneficial it would be to me & my friends/family who play multiplayer games w/ me @ my home. Not to mention, all of the other AC fans who it would benefit. (That includes AC fans who are not apart of the Ubisoft forums @ all, like a few friends of mine who are AC fans but they are just lazy when it comes to forums http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif )

Although I'm a dedicated & loyal fan of the SC series, I also love the entire AC series. And honestly, I paid in full for AC:B on my birthday this past summer, even though I didn't read up on all of its details: I remember saying to myself while I was on the checkout line @ gamestop, "If it's going to be anything like AC1 & AC2, I'd be crazy not to have it."

I'm really keeping my fingers crossed, hoping for that offline mutliplayer, but nonetheless, from what I have seen & know now, AC:B is going be outstanding.

DeafAtheist
10-05-2010, 01:34 AM
Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
You could asume so, but Ubisoft has already released a stealth-based versus game with SplinterCell Conviction with splitscreen.
There actually is a mode called duel i think, where you hide from your opponent assassinating both npcs as well as your target.

I have played hours and hours of it, and so far i've never screenlooked and neither my buddies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

That's Face Off you're thinking of.

AC-FANBOY
10-05-2010, 01:35 AM
Splitscreen will be nice in alliance...

kierans7ar
10-07-2010, 10:41 AM
I dont mean to sound mean but , did you even think that sentence though. Comparing Halo's multiplayer and Assassins Creeds it pointless, particularly when considering the idea of split screen.

The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.

now if we talk connecting systems thats an entirely different matter, becuase it allows offline playy without the worry of screen looking[/QUOTE]



I totally agree with this but i think maybe a co op campaign that differs from the main campaign that allows you and a friend to create an assasin and maybe be taught by Ezio and also upgrade your assasins skills and armor. Also this mode should be on single player but would be much better as a two player mission. Also the screen looking would be a huge problem but lets not forget there are other game modes too, there is one where you are shown a picture and the first person to assinate them gets most points. so the killing eachother isnt the only game mode.

Chewitt321
10-07-2010, 01:52 PM
I think competitive split-screen like the main game (i.e stealth and hiding etc.) is useless due to screen watching, but I think street-fighteresque fights could be good, with smoke bombs and other gaadgets as special moves. Or maybe a co-op, or free running races or capture the flags. Just a few ideas http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Chasebreaker
10-09-2010, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by kierans7ar:
I dont mean to sound mean but , did you even think that sentence though. Comparing Halo's multiplayer and Assassins Creeds it pointless, particularly when considering the idea of split screen.

The reason why many people dont like to do split screen is becapuse of a little thing called screen looking. When talking about screen looking in an FPS such as halo, it , but is a cheap why of finding your opponent it still comes down to who is better with their guns. In Assassins creed , the multplayer is hugely based around stealth, and as a result screen looking is much more deadly. all someone has to do is follow the on screen indicator and then look at the opponents side of the screen to know EXACTLY where the person is, meaning they win, or if both player are screen looking then it comes down to who has the brains to shoot the hidden gun first.

now if we talk connecting systems thats an entirely different matter, becuase it allows offline playy without the worry of screen looking


I totally agree with this but i think maybe a co op campaign that differs from the main campaign that allows you and a friend to create an assasin and maybe be taught by Ezio and also upgrade your assasins skills and armor. Also this mode should be on single player but would be much better as a two player mission. Also the screen looking would be a huge problem but lets not forget there are other game modes too, there is one where you are shown a picture and the first person to assinate them gets most points. so the killing eachother isnt the only game mode.[/QUOTE]



Ok, I agree that ACB's gameplay differs from Halo, but the reason doesn't.


The reason is: I would like to enjoy a game with my friends.


I can't say that i care that screenloking makes a bigger deal, it doesn't make me less want to share a good game with them.

Is assassinating my friend next to me really to much to ask =3 ?

DavisP92
10-09-2010, 05:09 PM
Assassin's Creed wouldn't work with split-screen multiplayer, and if Ubisoft choose to allow that offline function of multiplayer it would make the match a little unreasonble. You could see if the guy playing with you was behind you about to kill you. But if they added CO-OP story then thats another thing. Seeing your friends screen would benefit you, rather than hinder you. And its easy to find a way to justify a co-op story (according to ubisoft, they don't have co-op because they can't find a way to justify it).

Chasebreaker
10-13-2010, 11:27 AM
Well now, I think, as stated before, that Assassins Creed Brotherhood would be way more popular with splitscreen,. Why you ask? Well lets take another practical example.

Once upon a time Ubisoft made a stealth-based game, with a singleplayer campagin, multiplayer modes and even a whole co-op campaing. The game was called: SplinterCell Double Agent.

It was made during the big change to the next generations of consoles the PS3 and Xbox 360. Due to that fact Ubisoft made two versions of the game, A version in low resulotion and lesser graphics for the Ps2, Xbox and Gamecube and another for the Xbox 360 and PS3.


Now, one would think that with better graphics the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions would get better reviews and overall response from the fans.

That was usally not the case.

The new-gen versions usally got worse feedback in general. Perhaps because that it was developed by the Ubisoft Shanghai studio, and the old generation made by Ubisoft Montreal who made the previous Splintercell games.


However one feature did differ from the versions, can anyone guess what it is? yupp, splitscreen.

The PS3 and Xbox 360 both relied on online multiplay only, giving no splitscreen in either co-op or versus mode which the Ps2, Gamecube and xbox had, along with worse graphics.


So there we go, two versions of the same stealth game.
One featuring split screen which despite lesser graphics was better recieved by the fans.

DeafAtheist
10-13-2010, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by Chasebreaker:
Well now, I think, as stated before, that Assassins Creed Brotherhood would be way more popular with splitscreen,. Why you ask? Well lets take another practical example.

Once upon a time Ubisoft made a stealth-based game, with a singleplayer campagin, multiplayer modes and even a whole co-op campaing. The game was called: SplinterCell Double Agent.

It was made during the big change to the next generations of consoles the PS3 and Xbox 360. Due to that fact Ubisoft made two versions of the game, A version in low resulotion and lesser graphics for the Ps2, Xbox and Gamecube and another for the Xbox 360 and PS3.


Now, one would think that with better graphics the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions would get better reviews and overall response from the fans.

That was usally not the case.

The new-gen versions usally got worse feedback in general. Perhaps because that it was developed by the Ubisoft Shanghai studio, and the old generation made by Ubisoft Montreal who made the previous Splintercell games.


However one feature did differ from the versions, can anyone guess what it is? yupp, splitscreen.

The PS3 and Xbox 360 both relied on online multiplay only, giving no splitscreen in either co-op or versus mode which the Ps2, Gamecube and xbox had, along with worse graphics.


So there we go, two versions of the same stealth game.
One featuring split screen which despite lesser graphics was better recieved by the fans.

First of all the 7th gen version of Double Agent wasn't the only Splinter Cell made by Shanghai... they also worked on the original one and Pandora Tomorrow, but the original was jointly developed by Montreal as well.

Secondly, the 6th gen and 7th gen versions of the single player game were very different... they were practically 2 completely different games that were only loosely based on the same story. The 7th gen version featured a daylight mission for the 1st time which was a turn off to many fans of the franchise who preferred light & shadow stealth in the game to cover to cover stealth which was utilized in the daylight mission. Also the 7th gen version had upgrades to weapons and gadgets that could not be removed and some were more annoying than helpful, like the colored night vision, but then that brings up another problem with the game... night vision wasn't needed much because the darkest environments were still light enough to see well without them making them obsolete.

Those are just the single player problems. There were problems with the multiplayer too that had nothing to do with lack of a split-screen version.

I played both versions of the game, but never played the split screen multiplayer in the 6th gen version and even tho I didn't play that I still like the 6th gen version better. There were just several problems with the 7th gen version that have absolutely nothing to do with lack of a split-screen co-op so to judge it solely on that fact is both false and misleading because lack of split-screen multiplayer was the least of it's problems and probably wouldn't have been any better received by fans even if it did have split-screen because of all the other negative issues fans had with it.

Before the Xbox originals severs went down earlier this year the most played Splinter Cell multiplayer on that was spy vs mercs in Chaos Theory... Not many people were still playing 6th gen Double Agent anymore.

Meitanteiconan
10-13-2010, 01:50 PM
Do I want splitscreen? YES! Because I want to play my friends. It isn't exactly an answer to say: "Go buy a PS3 and get ACBrotherhood and lets play online!!"

I miss the days of being able to play with my friends because I BOUGHT something cool. Not because we BOTH had to buy it and then go to separate locations with two tvs to play with each other. (Unless I am fortunate to have two TVs in the same room...not often that happens.)

But, will Ubisoft add it?

No. The cameras, programming, the issue of screen watching, yada yada yada.

Let's just get this game released with some fixes to the Multiplayer on schedule and I am happy!

I still dream of split-screen but....doesn't matter to Ubisoft when it comes to making release dates.

Chasebreaker
10-28-2010, 09:33 AM
YES!

An at last a somewhat strong sign that makes me think ubisoft will implement splitscreen! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Watching that "Rebuilding Brotherhood" show made by Ubisoft one can in the second episode make out that the two of them are first jibbering on about screenlooking and later about who´s system they where playing on and on the youtube channel backround you clearly see both sittin' around chillin in the same sofa.



Sweet Ubisoft! Thank you! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Keighvin
10-28-2010, 01:05 PM
"Splitscreen is a ton of extra effort, and comes with a significant cost to graphical quality. We focused efforts elsewhere."

http://twitter.com/UbiGabe/status/28915360974

Rustfam09
10-30-2010, 11:18 PM
Having offline and online multi player modes would be ok. i see nothing wrong in having a great time with your friend http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif instead of virtual online friends.no fence to online friends. I just think people should have the freedom to choose online or offline modes. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

tyrce111
10-30-2010, 11:21 PM
Extra effort my FOOT!

All u gotta do is SPLIT THE SCREEN!!!

jamesr533
11-02-2010, 05:24 PM
Split screen would work, even if it wasnt the same as the MP gameplay you could do assassination contracts together. It eliminates the screen watching as you work together and the way it can fit to the storyline is that Abstergo is training their agents/soldiers to be able to work together like the assassins. Nothing wrong with that?

TYRONe19972000d
11-07-2010, 05:45 PM
I played the multiplayer beta, after you clicked on multiplayer you could either choose "online" or "local". I'm assuming local is split screen multiplayer. So now i can slit the neck of my little brother without going to prison!

Blaziruku
11-07-2010, 06:26 PM
Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
I played the multiplayer beta, after you clicked on multiplayer you could either choose "online" or "local". I'm assuming local is split screen multiplayer. So now i can slit the neck of my little brother without going to prison!
Ultimate fail right here. Local means people within your area (so if you live in this town, people in this town etc) or neighborhood. Somewhere closeby anyways.
I'd love splitscreen, but here's what would go wrong
- The developers would have to *justify* the second player (although they could use some random assassin in your brotherhood, they would be have to put some backstory in him)
- It's assassin's creed. It lags already sometimes during large epic battles, splitscreen would blow up your console because of all the needed space in your GPU(?) or whatever it uses.

It's a great idea but too bad it won't happen due to this aforementioned reasons. D:

Serenity9066
11-07-2010, 10:02 PM
Originally posted by Blaziruku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
I played the multiplayer beta, after you clicked on multiplayer you could either choose "online" or "local". I'm assuming local is split screen multiplayer. So now i can slit the neck of my little brother without going to prison!
Ultimate fail right here. Local means people within your area (so if you live in this town, people in this town etc) or neighborhood. Somewhere closeby anyways.
I'd love splitscreen, but here's what would go wrong
- The developers would have to *justify* the second player (although they could use some random assassin in your brotherhood, they would be have to put some backstory in him)
- It's assassin's creed. It lags already sometimes during large epic battles, splitscreen would blow up your console because of all the needed space in your GPU(?) or whatever it uses.

It's a great idea but too bad it won't happen due to this aforementioned reasons. D: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.

eoj19
11-08-2010, 01:37 AM
Originally posted by Serenity9066:
Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.

Very profound.

Serenity9066
11-08-2010, 02:53 AM
Originally posted by eoj19:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Serenity9066:
Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.

Very profound. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do I get the feeling you're being sarcastic?

bokeef04
11-08-2010, 02:54 AM
Originally posted by Serenity9066:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Blaziruku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
I played the multiplayer beta, after you clicked on multiplayer you could either choose "online" or "local". I'm assuming local is split screen multiplayer. So now i can slit the neck of my little brother without going to prison!
Ultimate fail right here. Local means people within your area (so if you live in this town, people in this town etc) or neighborhood. Somewhere closeby anyways.
I'd love splitscreen, but here's what would go wrong
- The developers would have to *justify* the second player (although they could use some random assassin in your brotherhood, they would be have to put some backstory in him)
- It's assassin's creed. It lags already sometimes during large epic battles, splitscreen would blow up your console because of all the needed space in your GPU(?) or whatever it uses.

It's a great idea but too bad it won't happen due to this aforementioned reasons. D: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i'm pretty sure my PS2 wouldn't have the power to run AC1 let alone AC2 or ACB(also i'm pretty sure they had to lower the quality and change some things with the force unleashed to get it onto the ps2), i think you misunderstand why splitscreen is so hard, to have a game run splitscreen it has to run two instances of the game simultaneously, think of it like if you tried to play the same game on two systems at once.

Serenity9066
11-08-2010, 03:07 AM
Hmmm, nah I still don't see it. Anyway, I had said before that the only real advancement was the graphics engine. This is why you have programmers is to find new ways to work with different game designs.

eoj19
11-08-2010, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by Serenity9066:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eoj19:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Serenity9066:
Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.

Very profound. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do I get the feeling you're being sarcastic? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


No! Actually, I'm 100% sincere in what I said to you. I found that your perspective was very profound in the sense that it made me ponder what you posted (above), very intently.

I'm sorry that my initial response came across that way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Furthermore, I particularly like what you mentioned about today's gaming industry coming up a bit short when it comes to certain elements that its predecessors would not have overlooked (ie: split screen). Many have agreed that split screen could work for co-op (ie: alliance), but it's also understood that there might be certain predicaments w/ graphics in terms of displaying 2 distinctive images in all of their graphical glory on one screen.

But I personally am an advocate for split screen (even though from the looks of it, there won't be one in ACB), but on a much grander scale, I am more concerned w/ today's gaming industry and the means that they are executing to "satisfy" today's gamers. Graphics aside,to certain extent they have treated certain simple, yet core elemental values of gaming as an oversight.
Something that the previous gen of gaming did not overlook.

With that being said, once again Serenity, that was a very profound point of view.

TYRONe19972000d
11-08-2010, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by Blaziruku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TYRONe19972000d:
I played the multiplayer beta, after you clicked on multiplayer you could either choose "online" or "local". I'm assuming local is split screen multiplayer. So now i can slit the neck of my little brother without going to prison!
Ultimate fail right here. Local means people within your area (so if you live in this town, people in this town etc) or neighborhood. Somewhere closeby anyways.
I'd love splitscreen, but here's what would go wrong
- The developers would have to *justify* the second player (although they could use some random assassin in your brotherhood, they would be have to put some backstory in him)
- It's assassin's creed. It lags already sometimes during large epic battles, splitscreen would blow up your console because of all the needed space in your GPU(?) or whatever it uses.

It's a great idea but too bad it won't happen due to this aforementioned reasons. D: </div></BLOCKQUOTE> haha SHUT UP!

Serenity9066
11-08-2010, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by eoj19:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Serenity9066:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eoj19:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Serenity9066:
Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.

Very profound. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why do I get the feeling you're being sarcastic? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


No! Actually, I'm 100% sincere in what I said to you. I found that your perspective was very profound in the sense that it made me ponder what you posted (above), very intently.

I'm sorry that my initial response came across that way http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Furthermore, I particularly like what you mentioned about today's gaming industry coming up a bit short when it comes to certain elements that its predecessors would not have overlooked (ie: split screen). Many have agreed that split screen could work for co-op (ie: alliance), but it's also understood that there might be certain predicaments w/ graphics in terms of displaying 2 distinctive images in all of their graphical glory on one screen.

But I personally am an advocate for split screen (even though from the looks of it, there won't be one in ACB), but on a much grander scale, I am more concerned w/ today's gaming industry and the means that they are executing to "satisfy" today's gamers. Graphics aside,to certain extent they have treated certain simple, yet core elemental values of gaming as an oversight.
Something that the previous gen of gaming did not overlook.

With that being said, once again Serenity, that was a very profound point of view. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Oh, I see. Well I'd actually like to see more online gameplay that doesn't revolve around playing with a bunch of random people who like to shout at eachother, and call eachother noobs left and right.

I thought RE5 did well with it's co-op, but the difference in a game like AC:B would be you'd want more freedom in character choices, and the amount of people running around being crazy stealthy assassins with one another with missions to do cooperatively, or just playing sandbox.
Still waiting on AC:B to come out to judge it further. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thank you Tyrone for your random *** post. I wouldn't have been so flattered by eoj19 if you hadn't. Hahaha.

eoj19
11-08-2010, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by Serenity9066:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Oh, I see. Well I'd actually like to see more online gameplay that doesn't revolve around playing with a bunch of random people who like to shout at each other, and call each other noobs left and right.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Not to say that versus has its place, but now you see why I prefer co-op!


I thought RE5 did well with it's co-op, but the difference in a game like AC:B would be you'd want more freedom in character choices, and the amount of people running around being crazy stealthy assassins with one another with missions to do cooperatively, or just playing sandbox.
Still waiting on AC:B to come out to judge it further. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I didn't have a chance to try out RE5's co-op, only its single player gameplay. But if you deem it's co-op to be good, then surely other gaming company's can do just as well or even better...IF they chose to.


Thank you Tyrone for your random *** post. I wouldn't have been so flattered by eoj19 if you hadn't. Hahaha.

Lol I think I'm the one who should be flattered http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

bmic31
11-08-2010, 08:57 PM
After reading through here's my 2 cents..

I know you have all watched the worlds build up like blocks at the beginning of a new time sequence. The areas are HUGE. Very detailed. Tons of climbing and free-running available. Now imagine you have to double the world you've created to try to juice as much out of the PS3 as you can.

Keep in mind, no game has been able to pull 100% out of the PS3 as far as the CPU. GT5 is the only one I think to come close to it and it's not released yet. But lets say building the world takes 35% of the cpu to run it, then double that to 70% just for the world, do you think they have extra room for everything else to happen? I doubt it.

And, I'm personally glad they aren't sacrificing graphics to give another feature. Each game they've progressively given us more features and enhanced gameplay. Offline multiplayer is something they can consider for AC:3 after they've mastered the online MP for this game.

I agree with Ubisoft for their choice for now, to me it makes sense.

Blaziruku
11-08-2010, 09:06 PM
Originally posted by Serenity9066:
Well I'd hate to be the one to say Ubisoft could do better, and is failing on purpose, but the kind of thinking where you have limits on platforms that haven't been challenged in anything but graphics wise is pretty confining, and restrictive. I'd hate to think that designers are purposefully putting up walls to limit creative thinking, because the so called consoles of the next generation aren't up to par with earlier game consoles. I guess that pretty much means they aren't really as great as their predecessors!

This is what disenchants me about most new games coming out.
Ya, the good old times of PS2, where CRASH bandicoot and all those fun games came out. The new games coming out are also quite good, but there are plenty that suck so hard I don't know why they even bother making it to earn like 60 bucks from 2 customers who are curious and barf their eyes out after playing it. Although I'm still sure on my decision, since the graphics (although in some screenshoots look kind of ugly) are usually good, which will blow up consoles with splitscreen burning the systems memory or w/e it is. Although Gran Turismo 5 is looking totally graphicspwnage. (they might have some dooads here or there that look ugly but are well hidden though!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) but we are held by our time period, becasue if we just knew wth to do, we would have photorealistic graphics and everyone would look real! Which would be awesome, but also really creepy. And another last note. I'm pretty sure we will almost never be able to make Real physics (there will always be the hand or leg here or there that can go through walls because developers dont want to waste time making the hand so real it collides with walls) and there will always be something that can go through somewhere that isn't right. There isn't one game (probably never will until we find the ultimate graphics) that hasn't had one part or another go through something (such as a wall or car)

eoj19
11-09-2010, 02:47 AM
@ bmic31,

To prove to you that I know exactly what you mean, allow me to quote something that I just posted on this page (I put the part that you might agree with in bold:


Originally posted by eoj19:
Many have agreed that split screen could work for co-op (ie: alliance), but it's also understood that there might be certain predicaments w/ graphics in terms of displaying 2 distinctive images in all of their graphical glory on one screen.

I said that to say this: although I personally want to see more attention offline in terms of multiplayer, I agree that is not going to happen, @ least not now.


Originally posted by bmic31:
Offline multiplayer is something they can consider for AC:3 after they've mastered the online MP for this game.
Well said.


@ Blaziruku,


Originally posted by Blaziruku:
And another last note. I'm pretty sure we will almost never be able to make Real physics (there will always be the hand or leg here or there that can go through walls because developers dont want to waste time making the hand so real it collides with walls) and there will always be something that can go through somewhere that isn't right. There isn't one game (probably never will until we find the ultimate graphics) that hasn't had one part or another go through something (such as a wall or car)

How true! But my question is, how long do you think implementing those type of graphical/environmental reactions in today's games? Imo, probably a long while. I hope I'm wrong though.

But nonetheless, I completely agree w/ you; there isn't one game (to my knowledge) that hasn't had a character or such, have their hand/limbs or accessories/clothing go through walls or any other part of the environment when they are standing close to it. I will be surprised when there's a game that will correct such a flaw.

Blaziruku
11-10-2010, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by eoj19:
@ bmic31,

To prove to you that I know exactly what you mean, allow me to quote something that I just posted on this page (I put the part that you might agree with in bold:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eoj19:
Many have agreed that split screen could work for co-op (ie: alliance), but it's also understood that there might be certain predicaments w/ graphics in terms of displaying 2 distinctive images in all of their graphical glory on one screen.

I said that to say this: although I personally want to see more attention offline in terms of multiplayer, I agree that is not going to happen, @ least not now.


Originally posted by bmic31:
Offline multiplayer is something they can consider for AC:3 after they've mastered the online MP for this game.
Well said.


@ Blaziruku,


Originally posted by Blaziruku:
And another last note. I'm pretty sure we will almost never be able to make Real physics (there will always be the hand or leg here or there that can go through walls because developers dont want to waste time making the hand so real it collides with walls) and there will always be something that can go through somewhere that isn't right. There isn't one game (probably never will until we find the ultimate graphics) that hasn't had one part or another go through something (such as a wall or car)

How true! But my question is, how long do you think implementing those type of graphical/environmental reactions in today's games? Imo, probably a long while. I hope I'm wrong though.

But nonetheless, I completely agree w/ you; there isn't one game (to my knowledge) that hasn't had a character or such, have their hand/limbs or accessories/clothing go through walls or any other part of the environment when they are standing close to it. I will be surprised when there's a game that will correct such a flaw. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A long long time probably. It's just almost impossible to make your character react so realistically since you're not actually HANDLING the character, only making the character virtually from a distance where you can't make them feel *complete* rather than hollow like they actually are. It could happen, but would require tons of work, and a huge amount of ram (polygons etc)

Rainie
11-10-2010, 07:58 PM
I'm not opposed to split-screen but I personally would never play it with the ACB multiplayer. It's not that I don't want to play with friends that come over but I feel it would ruin the gameplay, at least for me. When I played in the beta it helped a lot being able to have a wide field of vision. It helps me find my target, look out for pursuers and watch how the npcs are moving all at the same time. If the screen was halved it would mean a lot more rotating the camera while I walk or standing still while try to watch the other people because I can't see as much around me.

I personally don't think it's right to compare the gameplay of ACB's multiplayer to that of FPS games like Halo or CoD, to me they're totally different. With games like that if you see another person on the screen they are most likely a target or your ally. With ACB, the screen is filled with people (majority of them npcs), if you make 1 mistake and you've lost your chance at that target and have to locate someone else. In FPS games you can just basically keep shooting until you hit something. There I can see split-screen working because you don't necessarily need the wide field of vision, but then again, that's just how I like to play.

Also I can understand that some people aren't connected to the internet and want to play locally with their friends, but remember that a match requires 6 players. Sure Ubisoft could try and create an AI to fill up the other player spots if you're only playing with say 2 people but I think you would lose the challenge that comes with playing against other people. With a player controlling a character they become more unpredictable and harder to catch than any AI someone can program. AI is a set of rules that a program goes through, if you can decipher these rules then it can get pretty easy to find out who is who.

And if there were online split-screen where there was a rule the person you were playing with could never target you, then you've basically whittled down your number of possible pursuers and targets to 4 (or 6), and that's with only 2-player split screen. If you were playing with 3 other friends, then you all would be stuck hunting down the same 2 (or 4) players that are not in the same room with you.

Don't know if any of that makes sense but that's my opinion of adding split-screen. For the way I play, it wouldn't work. If it was ever implemented I would never use it but I wouldn't complain about it either. To me it would make the multiplayer lose its charm and what makes it more enjoyable than any other multiplayer

Nephetslol
11-10-2010, 10:36 PM
I just made an account to say this.

Open world spilt screen games do not work.

They are absoloute nightmare technically. The game can not handle it and slows down to a snails pace. The only game I have seen work splitscreen into sort of openworld is l4d. And even than the graphics get lowered to an extreme.

And the FPS is almost unplayable...

Nephetslol
11-10-2010, 10:38 PM
What I do want to see is a co-op online single player story now that would be BA.

borga708
11-12-2010, 07:33 PM
on and offline would be good because some people have xbox live and some don't.

Phantom.Xmer
11-13-2010, 11:06 PM
I would like to address your attention to the listed achievements/trophies:

Role Model (Bronze): Get all the Co-Op bonuses in one session.

Source:
http://www.ps3trophies.org/gam...rotherhood/trophies/ (http://www.ps3trophies.org/game/assassins-creed-brotherhood/trophies/)

Rainie
11-14-2010, 12:04 AM
by co-op they mean the alliance mode in the MP where you're partnered with another player

KabouterPitta
11-16-2010, 12:00 PM
I would really like an offline coop @ acb too.
Would be awesome to play it together with your friends in splitscreen.

V1P3R281
11-16-2010, 10:11 PM
It doesnt have to be Split screen.. It only has to be for two players on one XBOX 360 and it can be used just like the two player co-op on Fable 2. Where you share the same screen it isnt split and you can only move a certain distance from the other player or screen distance same if you were online.