is "playing with freinds in the same room" completley dead?

[Vault101]

I find it pretty funny, multiplayer is creeping into more and more games and yet the gaming expereince has become more "solitary"...in a manner of speaking

because to be honest, aside from fighting games like mortal combat or racing games (I think) and such I really cant think of many games that allow you to play multiplayer with somone else in the same room, with another controller...it seems the only use for a second controller is charging rotation :/

its also funny that "split screen"....you know that thing we did on the N64 with golden eye...is pretty much non-existant...and yet our TV's are generally bigger than ever

OR am I wrong? my first question is are there any relitivley recent games that make use of "in the same room" multiplayer?

AND...well why? is it purley greed? (an extra console/game per person) or is there somone other cost/technicla reason?

(yeah I know this is one main point of the wii...but...well Im not a fan of the wii)

 

[felbot]

halo 3 let you have split screen and im actually sure call of duty has support for more players in the same room.
also its probably just because of the focus on online multi player.

 

[ankensam]

i find i do most of my gaming with friends in the same room as me we tend not to be playing the same games but only because i prefer pc singleplayer games but we do play local multiplayer a lot and whenever my school friends come over we play halo or gears for a good multiplayer game

 

[Strain42]

No, not entirely. I'm still doing it here and there. Yes, it's less frequent, but it's still happening.

Cartoon Network Punch Time Explosion: XL and Kirby: Return to Dreamland both have in the same room multi-player, and so does the WiiWare game Pokemon Rumble.

There are also co-op games like Marvel Ultimate Alliance and the Portal Co-Op mode (which I haven't played yet but I assume can be played split screen)

So yeah, it's rarer which kinda sucks. But I still enjoy it.

I know you're not a fan of the Wii, but they're the ones doing a better job of it right now.

EDIT: Just remember CNTE:XL is actually on the 360 and PS3 as well, so if you wanna play the co-op story there, you're more than welcome to.

 

[I.Muir]

Taking turns and messing about in single player counts as them being in the same room right

 

[Baradiel]

Well I've just moved into a shared house, and due to not having the money for a TV license, and not caring enough to ring them up and tell them I'm not watching telly, I don't have a TV, and I didn't bring my 360.

However, my housemate DOES have both, and although he is restricted to Black Ops and Fifa, its still very fun to play Gun Game on CoD (something I'd never THINK of doing if I was on Live on my own)

So... no, I'd say it isn't completely dead. I think even if I had my own 360 and was perfectly capable of playing Live, I'd often go across the corridor to his room and play there (except he DOES have a violent streak)

 

[Shoggoth2588]

It seems like the closest you're going to get to that is through LAN parties. Since the PS3 and X360 have profile and achievement systems, it's hard to find people willing to play 'guest' and miss out on achievements for those few games that do still offer split-screen or, same-console multiplayer like Guitar Hero.

This is part of the reason I've taken to hunting for older games and consoles. Sure, my GF and I both have TVs and 360s but it's so much easier to pop in Super Mario Kart or, Mario Party.

This reminds me, I need to find Donkey Konga o.o!

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Things like FPSs yeah, since local means split-screen which sucked back in the day...and you're getting this from a guy who loved playing quake 2 on his PSX with 4 way split screen (yes, I actually had a multi-tap). Split screen just ruins a lot of the fun it you're playing on an average size TV.


I don't play any multiplayer games other than fighting games though, and those do have quite a few "same room" competitions cause online lag affects them more than most other genres, so I may be a bit skewed but I don't see much of a problem.



The issue is simply finding a community of skilled players. A lot of people who play games are too lighthearted about them, not taking them seriously etc. so when you get a guy really good at the game it can sorta kill the fun and make him be the one who feels left out by being actually too GOOD at the game, while online there's always someone better and the average person is overall better than the average local player, which makes the games quite a bit more interesting.

When you have people seeking to improve their skills, they'll go for the biggest skill pool imaginable and unless you reside in Tachikawa Tokyo, your local peers won't be up to par with your online competition.

 

[Samuel Cook]

I play more splitscreen at the moment than I do on Xbox Live and PSN. It's a shame there aren't many games that support it, my last two purchases were disappointing and all the others I've had suggested, I already own.

 

[Esvees]

It's not dead, just becoming limited to games that play as well on one screen as several. Fighting games are a prime example, I spend a massive amount of time playing Marvel vs Capcom at my mate's house. Another one was Monsters (PSN tower defence game)

But I wouldn't play a shooter or racing game on one screen as I still prefer a better view to being completely lag-free.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Borderlands
Portal 2
Halo Reach

The ones I own, at least.

 

[BeerTent]

I find it pretty funny, multiplayer is creeping into more and more games and yet the gaming expereince has become more "solitary"...in a manner of speaking

because to be honest, aside from fighting games like mortal combat or racing games (I think) and such I really cant think of many games that allow you to play multiplayer with somone else in the same room, with another controller...it seems the only use for a second controller is charging rotation :/

its also funny that "split screen"....you know that thing we did on the N64 with golden eye...is pretty much non-existant...and yet our TV's are generally bigger than ever

OR am I wrong? my first question is are there any relitivley recent games that make use of "in the same room" multiplayer?

AND...well why? is it purley greed? (an extra console/game per person) or is there somone other cost/technicla reason?

(yeah I know this is one main point of the wii...but...well Im not a fan of the wii)

I've actually noticed this a lot with consoles. My new (Awesome) roommate is a halo guy, and although I'm not a giant fan of Halo, I'd still love to do some shenanigans with him. Sure, ODST gives a great co-op experience, but I've noticed in the other halo's, it's either 2 player split screen, or nothing. Hell, Red Faction Armageddon eschewed the entire splitscreen deal altogether. Do you realize how ridiculously fun that game would be?

At least it helps that all three of us have a Steam account. Along with me being a network savvy admin, It helps connect our lan and online games significantly better. We've managed to make SimCity 4 into a multiplayer experience, with restrictions.

If your like me, and your a co-oppy person, try these games for the PC.
Spiral Knights
Killing Floor
Civilization series
Sol survivor
Brink
and MineCraft or Terreria

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Lots of games have co-op and splitscreen multiplayer, so I`m not really sure what to tell you. In fact, the Multiplayer games I can think of that DON`T offer some sort of split screen option are games that are, traditionally, single player action-adventure, like Assassin`s Creed or Dead Space. Nearly all shooters, racing, fighting, sports, and even puzzle games offer spilt-screen/co-op.

 

[No_Remainders]

I dunno. Me and three of my friends spent yesterday and last Saturday playing system link gears of war on two consoles in the same room with really big HDTVs.

It was fucking awesome. Especially when it got late and we started a drinking game. Every time you die, you do a shot.

The more you die, the more you drink, the drunker you get, the worse your reactions, the more you die.

It's quite fun.

 

[wooty]

Depends on the game, I've had plenty of 2p games of FIFA12 and Blazblue in the last week. Even my mates XBL gold ran out, so hes been round here playing the BF3 beta on the PS3......if that counts.

 

[Overlordkain]

I was very pleasantly surprised when I saw the option for splitscreen on Uncharted 3, not all my friends that come over can always afford to get games at certain times and so the option for splitscreen is always welcome.
It still bums be out when a few features are watered down when split screening though, or draw distance on some games is cut down horribly.
I would rather have the option than not have it but It does seem to be a missing option from alot of games these days especially on some clearly multiplayer focused games.

 

[Aetherlblade]

I love to play starcraft 2 with a friend in the same roon. just being able to point at stuff or yell at him in person does wonders for your skill level and sheer fun of course. But aside from that and lan parties i dont do it a lot as im not a console gamer .

 

[repeating integers]

Personally, I still do it all the time. There are plenty of good games which let you have great fun if you bring a load of friends round - and even if it lacks splitscreen, there's nothing wrong with taking turns.

I MAAAADE, A GAAAAME, WITH ZOOOOMBIIEES IN IIIIT YEEEAAAAAAH

 

[Vault101]

Things like FPSs yeah, since local means split-screen which sucked back in the day...and you're getting this from a guy who loved playing quake 2 on his PSX with 4 way split screen (yes, I actually had a multi-tap). Split screen just ruins a lot of the fun it you're playing on an average size TV.


I don't play any multiplayer games other than fighting games though, and those do have quite a few "same room" competitions cause online lag affects them more than most other genres, so I may be a bit skewed but I don't see much of a problem.



The issue is simply finding a community of skilled players. A lot of people who play games are too lighthearted about them, not taking them seriously etc. so when you get a guy really good at the game it can sorta kill the fun and make him be the one who feels left out by being actually too GOOD at the game, while online there's always someone better and the average person is overall better than the average local player, which makes the games quite a bit more interesting.

When you have people seeking to improve their skills, they'll go for the biggest skill pool imaginable and unless you reside in Tachikawa Tokyo, your local peers won't be up to par with your online competition.

thats the thing though, if your serioues...sure

but if you dont have alot of real hardcore "gamer" freinds, and just want to have some freinds over and have a good time, well thats what Im talking about,

 

[Something Amyss]

AND...well why? is it purley greed? (an extra console/game per person) or is there somone other cost/technicla reason?

While I think a chunk of it's greed, it's also harder to make local multiplayer work in terms of system resources, so there is a technical element to it.