Is anyone competent going to be on TNT this year?

#1 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5335 posts) -

Note: This is absolutely not a slant on Ryan Davis or whoever else might play this from the GB staff, AC multiplayer has a learning curve and game reviewers don't have time to overcome those typically. But as far as the randomly selected players go they tend to be pretty bad and I'd be interested to see someone good really dominate a TNT match since it's relatively easy to do so and to see the response.

Aside: If anyone particularly seasoned at AC multiplayer has this game yet what are your early impressions?

#2 Posted by Brother_PipPop (252 posts) -

The learning curve isn't all that much. You can hold your own after the first match, or rather half way through.

#3 Posted by cbarnes86 (545 posts) -

Is the multiplayer much different than the Brotherhood and Revelations MP? I really enjoyed those multiplayers, but there was the learning curve and the point that half of the time, everyone was just running around getting 100 point kills.

#4 Posted by Rafaelfc (1313 posts) -

yeah cause high level play is what TNT is all about...

Online
#5 Posted by david3cm (635 posts) -

@cbarnes86: thats why you were getting 100 point kills. And its not that much different, in preview coverage they showed different game modes like domination and others, but whenever I hit quick match I just get plain old deathmatch.

#6 Posted by Lazyaza (2166 posts) -

I don't think you understand what the point of tnts is. I watch them in the hope of seeing hilarity and nonsense, which requires people who aren't dead-faced serious about what they are doing, including both the gb guys and the people they are playing with and against.

#7 Posted by RAMBO604 (137 posts) -

The multiplayer seems functionally identical to the few hours I played of Revelations. The MP in these games is good but it requires a time investment that is just too high. Far higher than the learning curve which is really not that bad.

As far as MP goes anyone else think the menus are a confusing mess? Everything is so cluttered and needlessly complicated.

#8 Posted by Irvandus (2819 posts) -

@Rafaelfc said:

yeah cause high level play is what TNT is all about...

#9 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5335 posts) -

Again I'm not suggesting that the overall play should be high level, I'd just be interested to see the response to an experienced player; or really anyone using a different approach than the standard "I played a few hours of AC and still have no idea what I'm doing except that I understand basic systems." It's seriously like watching a chicken with its head cut off running around. Most of the humor comes from the GB guys not from a random person participating. 1.5 hours of nothing but inexperienced players is a bit dry and not all that amusing compared to a potential fish out of water sort of experience. Good AC players are rare I will grant, but maybe there's someone vaguely competent out there?

@RAMBO604 said:

The multiplayer seems functionally identical to the few hours I played of Revelations. The MP in these games is good but it requires a time investment that is just too high. Far higher than the learning curve which is really not that bad.

As far as MP goes anyone else think the menus are a confusing mess? Everything is so cluttered and needlessly complicated.

You're right about the menus being a bit awkward at first but they're kind of aesthetically designed instead of functionally desinged. They look cool or Animus-like instead of being straightforward; some level of appeal and not the worst menus ever; certainly easy to navigate after a few hours.

#10 Posted by Aishan (1009 posts) -

@Fredchuckdave: Fear not, I am the best player in the entire world and I shall make everyone jealous of my stabbing skills.

I once got a kill worth 250(!) points, you know.

#11 Posted by Grissefar (2842 posts) -

@Fredchuckdave said:

Note: This is absolutely not a slant on Ryan Davis or whoever else might play this from the GB staff, AC multiplayer has a learning curve and game reviewers don't have time to overcome those typically. But as far as the randomly selected players go they tend to be pretty bad and I'd be interested to see someone good really dominate a TNT match since it's relatively easy to do so and to see the response.

Aside: If anyone particularly seasoned at AC multiplayer has this game yet what are your early impressions?

@Fredchuckdave said:

Again I'm not suggesting that the overall play should be high level, I'd just be interested to see the response to an experienced player; or really anyone using a different approach than the standard "I played a few hours of AC and still have no idea what I'm doing except that I understand basic systems." It's seriously like watching a chicken with its head cut off running around. Most of the humor comes from the GB guys not from a random person participating. 1.5 hours of nothing but inexperienced players is a bit dry and not all that amusing compared to a potential fish out of water sort of experience. Good AC players are rare I will grant, but maybe there's someone vaguely competent out there?

@RAMBO604 said:

The multiplayer seems functionally identical to the few hours I played of Revelations. The MP in these games is good but it requires a time investment that is just too high. Far higher than the learning curve which is really not that bad.

As far as MP goes anyone else think the menus are a confusing mess? Everything is so cluttered and needlessly complicated.

You're right about the menus being a bit awkward at first but they're kind of aesthetically designed instead of functionally desinged. They look cool or Animus-like instead of being straightforward; some level of appeal and not the worst menus ever; certainly easy to navigate after a few hours.

Your attitude on this topic is a little awkward, man.

#12 Posted by Dagbiker (6939 posts) -

A single guy winning a match over and over single handedly for 2 hours with no competition is not my idea of a good 2 hours.

#13 Posted by Benny (1947 posts) -

I don't think this site is for you if you want that from a TNT

#14 Posted by CaLe (3910 posts) -

Do you even know anything about Giant Bomb?

#15 Posted by dudeglove (7685 posts) -

GRAAAAWWHHH I HATE NOOBS GRAAWWWHH

#16 Edited by Fredchuckdave (5335 posts) -

@Dagbiker: I'm not saying 2 hours worth of matches just one match is fine; it can be a real eye opener to see a good player at AC; there's a shitload of depth to the systems. While methods vary in usefulness and cheapness generally a competent player will approach the game in an interesting fashion. It's not as simple as "I'm better at pointing and clicking than you," and hence can't be picked up on immediately.

@dudeglove: I don't hate noobs, they're a wonderful source of points and a hilarious 100% winning percentage.

#17 Posted by cbarnes86 (545 posts) -

@david3cm: I only ran around if the rest of the people were. I tried to play the game the way it was meant to be played

#18 Posted by Nev (539 posts) -

I really could care less how well the guys play. Just call up Will Smith to dance in front of a green screen or something, and you have a pretty solid TNT.

#19 Posted by thomasnash (539 posts) -

People talking about how the multi player compares to previosu games, so I'm going to hijack this thread briefly. I'm not super experienced with the multiplayer in brotherhood and revelations, but the fact that they moved the stun button onto the x with the kill button keeps throwing me. It's definitely a sensible move because before you'd know who was chasing you because a b prompt would appear above them, but I definitely find myself hitting the b button and losing points because of it.

It's a shame that so many people do just run around like lunatics. Sure they only get small points bonuses but it makes it very difficult to play the game in the way that I think is most fun, all sneaky like. It's why so far my favourite game mode is probably Manhunt, because there are more opportunities for devious play. I quite like Domination as well. I kind of enjoy the challenge of the CTF equivalent but I don't think it works quite as well as it should, mainly because the pursuer always has the advantage.

#20 Posted by Milkman (16526 posts) -

What makes you think that they're playing AC III on TNT?

Online
#21 Posted by Phatmac (5721 posts) -

Who says they're going to be playing AC3 for TNT?

#22 Posted by fox01313 (5061 posts) -

TNT is just for the GB crew to have some time to play with the community (or others on the site on other TNT episodes) with cameras & commentary. They rarely try to do any high level of gameplay in these & like others, I really don't want to see one person just owning the match for game after game as that will get old rather fast.

#23 Posted by nail1O8O (2 posts) -

Holy shit gamers these days are very fucking dumb if you think AC multiplayer is complicated, oh no poor game reviewers (who spend their entire day playing the game) how can we expect them to cope with the complex game mechanics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!????????????????

#24 Posted by dekkadekkadekka (726 posts) -

I have a 100% win record in Brotherhood. Ask me anything.

#25 Posted by Taku128 (793 posts) -

What the hell are they even playing for TNT this week? They pondered both Need for Speed and Halo 4 on ILM but didn't decide on one, and didn't even mention Assassin's Creed 3.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.