Whatever happened to split screen?

Recommended Videos

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
The Iron Ninja post=9.72552.764591 said:
thejackyl post=9.72552.764589 said:
True, but not every good thing combines well with other good things. Consider mixing sex and food.
Speak for yourself (insert smiley here that suggests the previous statement was made in jest)
Ice cream in the bedroom? *thumbs up*
 

Malvoo

New member
Sep 26, 2008
17
0
0
Eggo post=9.72552.764594 said:
I just realized that the only reason I'm in at work right now is because my boss wants us to throw a CSS and WC3 LAN party using the audio/video workstations in our lab.

Oh the coincidence and irony.

LAN parties are fun; maybe I'll sit in on a round of de_dust2 or something :]
Sounds fun, wish i could be there to kick your ass in wc3 :p
 

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
Eggo post=9.72552.764599 said:
And that reminds me, if we're talking about college, there really shouldn't be any excuse why you can't organize a very entertaining LAN party if you know so many gamers (and so many girl gamers too oh noes!).
Don't put words in my mouth please. I never made any comments about LAN partys except that they can be time consuming to set up.
Last I checked the thread was about the decline of split-screen and all I've been saying is that I think split-screen is a good thing.
 

Malvoo

New member
Sep 26, 2008
17
0
0
Eggo post=9.72552.764602 said:
I suck at strategy games so that wouldn't be something to be proud of! :3
Last time I played, which is like 2 years ago, i was at around 150 apm, playing ze imba night elf DH!
 

DeadlyFred

New member
Aug 13, 2008
305
0
0
Because the 360 will blow up when trying to render ONE screen's worth of information, let alone multiple -- simple answer, really: the games are using all the power the consoles have as it is.
 

Eldritch Warlord

New member
Jun 6, 2008
2,901
0
0
DeadlyFred post=9.72552.764615 said:
Because the 360 will blow up when trying to render ONE screen's worth of information, let alone multiple -- simple answer, really: the games are using all the power the consoles have as it is.
Fanboy alert, arm yourselves men!
 

The Iron Ninja

New member
Aug 13, 2008
2,868
0
0
Eggo post=9.72552.764581 said:
The Iron Ninja post=9.72552.764460 said:
If I had a choice between playing with some thirteen year old who calls me a ****** for three hours or my awesome, drunk friends. I'm going to pick the latter.
In that case, I suppose I must have some strange superpower which lets me mute annoying 13 year olds on all of the games I play.
You're missing my point. Even if you muted the little shit, who would you rather play games with? Him or your friends?
Eggo said:
The Iron Ninja said:
And for the record I'm agruing with you for claiming that what I was talking about was sausagefests. I'm sorry that you don't know any girl gamers personally, and that apparently none of your friends like to game, but maybe that's something you should work on.
I have a couple of friends who game, but I tend to make close friends with people for other (and what I consider far more important) reasons than how much they play split-screen console games. Between my girlfriend, my friends, work, school, research, and the two student groups I'm on the executive board for, gaming is a fun 1-2 hour per week distraction. Is it okay if I don't want it to be more of a salient part of my life?
Wait... you mean you have a different point of view to gaming then me, oh no! I'd better jump down your throat about it since that seems to be the norm here.


Eggo said:
The Iron Ninja said:
Having a beer with my mates while attempting to play crash team racing is one of the fondest memories I have of my college years (high school for you americans)
The best memories I have had of my college years thus far (university for you non-americans) have been being super popular and talking to beautiful and interesting people at awesome parties. But to each his own, I suppose.
Yeah that pretty much sums up this whole thread. Either you like split screen or you don't, it makes no sence to argue that it needs to be dropped when so many people still play using such a method.
But it's also pointless standing up for such a way of gaming when there are those that are so hard set in their views that the idea of people having different opinions doesn't occur to them. So I'm off to another thread.
 

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
DeadlyFred post=9.72552.764615 said:
Because the 360 will blow up when trying to render ONE screen's worth of information, let alone multiple -- simple answer, really: the games are using all the power the consoles have as it is.
Well, no. I played multiplayer on FarCry and PDZ and it ran like a dream. It did get killed by a DVD though...
 

Space Spoons

New member
Aug 21, 2008
3,334
0
0
I'm not happy about it either. For example: When GTA IV came out, I was looking forward to seeking out a multiplayer icon and wreaking havoc with my sister, who loves GTA. Imagine my surprise when I learned that there was no local multiplayer... Only online.

For me, half the fun of San Andreas was picking up the multiplayer icon in Los Santos and tearing up the town with a friend. It was always a great experience, and everyone I knew seemed to agree. I can't fathom why the same option wasn't available in IV. Talk about missed opportunity.

I know it's not split-screen, by the way, but the principal's the same.
 

some random guy

New member
Nov 4, 2007
131
0
0
Malvoo, your whole argument here kinda reminds me of when sony tried to justify the sixaxis' lack of rumble by claiming that vibration was a last gen feature.

Split screen may be inferior to online play in terms of technology and possibly gameplay but that does not make it inferior as a whole. Split screen has always been more social and, most importantly, more fun. There's a big difference between talking to each other through headsets and actually being next to the person you're playing with. Some of my most memorable and enjoyable gaming experiences have been with my friends.

Also, you're implying that it's a choice between split screen and online play. How? Why not both? If COD4 can have single player, online and split screen with undoubtedly brilliant visuals then I don't see what excuse anybody else has.
 

Serious_Stalin

New member
Aug 11, 2008
237
0
0
Malvoo post=9.72552.764375 said:
Split screen has been replaced with the most revolutionary and greatest way of gaming ever. Playing it on the Internet or Lan. What's wrong with you people? Split screen was good in it's time (I had loads of fun with Golden eye for the 64 as well.) But it's obviously a video game feature of the past.
Please, I really don't think its the same as screwing about with your friends in the same room, I like internet gaming but even when you play with friends its not as if they're actually there and that counts as your social interaction with the human race for a day.

People do manage to have fun playing games together, its the same with LAN although sometimes LAN feels a bit more competitive. A lot of people here have kind of said they think it is unsocial to play multiplayer but I think they're missing the point that the competive edge has completely dropped and its more about having a good time than winning.

Unrelated my new favorite multiplayer gem is fight night round 3, its hilarious.
 

Dommyboy

New member
Jul 20, 2008
2,439
0
0
Halo games have 4 player split screen.
...
*Goes silent*
...

Anyhow! Some games use too much of the consoles resources so too many players at once would just cause mass lag and burn out the console with some games. Ahh, nothing better than quality, bugless gaming devices.
 

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
some random guy post=9.72552.764689 said:
Malvoo, your whole argument here kinda reminds me of when sony tried to justify the sixaxis' lack of rumble by claiming that vibration was a last gen feature.
But people care about split screen. If someone gave you a controller with a vibratey thing or without a vibratey thing, would you really care? How much does it increase the games experience?
 

WolfLordAndy

New member
Sep 19, 2008
776
0
0
Phoenix Arrow post=9.72552.766031 said:
some random guy post=9.72552.764689 said:
Malvoo, your whole argument here kinda reminds me of when sony tried to justify the sixaxis' lack of rumble by claiming that vibration was a last gen feature.
But people care about split screen. If someone gave you a controller with a vibratey thing or without a vibratey thing, would you really care? How much does it increase the games experience?
a) its additional indication of when you're getting hit/shot/etc

b) you have to love when it starts going nuts as you're firing some sort of minigun mowing things down :D

Petty points I know, and vibrate has very little impact on real gameplay other then adding a bit more immersion.
 

xitel

Assume That I Hate You.
Aug 13, 2008
4,618
0
0
I still say that getting cursed out by one of your friends cause you stuck a grenade to the back of his head is far more entertaining when he;s in the room with you.
 

Caliostro

Headhunter
Jan 23, 2008
3,253
0
0
Whatever you wanna argue, developers just see no reason in including split screen anymore.

Split-Screen pros:
- Allows several people to play off the same console, game and tv.

Cons:
- Additional coding.
- Everyone can see everyone else's game so strategy and the surprise element pretty much go fuck themselves.
- Unnecessary eye strain.
- More confusing than other methods since all games are happening in the same place at once, your brain can't help but to loose focus to whatever else is going on.
- Your field of vision in-game is basically shit.
- If you don't happen to have a big tv, in games where a lot of stuff is going on, it can get downright impossible to keep track of what's happening.
- All consoles except the Wii have good online now, you don't need to drag people to each other's houses. And if you do want to go over for a party...
- ...You can just hook the consoles/PCs in a lan, it's not that complicated.
- Means several people only have to buy 1 game... which isn't all that good for developers.
- The internet still exists.


See what I'm getting at it here...? Split-screen was necessary a while ago cause it was the most reliable multiplayer method in a console. Now it's just old and unnecessary in most cases.
 

humpees

New member
Sep 23, 2008
98
0
0
I can see the pros of online but I still enjoy a good lads (it's just a collective term for mates in this sense, not all males) night when we all get together and play split screen.

Screenwatching is very much allowed because when you're in this environment a tough to reach hiding place isn't very much in the spirit of the game.

It does only really work with FPS' though.
 

Phoenix Arrow

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,377
0
0
xitel post=9.72552.769210 said:
I still say that getting cursed out by one of your friends cause you stuck a grenade to the back of his head is far more entertaining when he;s in the room with you.
The remote mines in TimeSplitters 2 were awesome. Did like an 8 player splitscreen with 2 consoles and I stuck grenades on 3 of the other team and blew them up at the same time. They weren't best pleased.
I miss that game. You could also turn off friendly fire and suicide bomb people on splitscreen.
 

NeedAUserName

New member
Aug 7, 2008
3,803
0
0
Ridiculously easy to get online play. On the PS2/PSone online was really annoying to hook up, now its easy as sin. (Dunno about xBox though)
 

shatnershaman

New member
May 8, 2008
2,627
0
0
Split-Screen is still here:

Gears 2
Fable 2
GH
Rock Band
Resistance 2(?)

I love splitscreen maybe it doesn't render as nice but its fun with friends which is important. LAN has the problem of bringing over the system and having two TVs and games. How can you play if you both of you don't have the same stuff?