What's happened to split screen Multiplayer?
- Thread starter CTU_Agent24
- Start date
Recommended Videos
His argument is a little bit the other way around; if you were *only* buying it for multiplayer co-op, with a specific other player, and split screen was available, you might only need 1 copy. If only online play is available you need 2. Of course you could still decide to both go sit at home, but a lot of games are just more fun with someone on the couch next to you.HuCast said:Sorry, but thats an argument I dont understand? If I have, lets say Bioshock and my friend would like to play the game then he would NOT buy it if it had splitscreen multiplayer???StevieC said:
Thats the weirdest argument Ive ever read
yeah it has split screen it supports 2 players
Also the last time i check
COD4
Haze
The Darkness
Quake 4
are this gen game
Who gives a f--k if they are old there still good games.
S--t Haze just came out 6 weeks ago
I mean you girlfriend p---y is old but you still f--k it dont you?
Also the last time i check
COD4
Haze
The Darkness
Quake 4
are this gen game
Who gives a f--k if they are old there still good games.
S--t Haze just came out 6 weeks ago
I mean you girlfriend p---y is old but you still f--k it dont you?
Developer: We are almost done the game!
Community: We want Splitscreen!
Dev: But you will barely use it online is where all the people are at
Com: We want Splitscreen.
Dev: Ok but its will be twice as taxing on the hardware so we will have to make the graphics worse.
Com: We want Splitscreen and the best graphics.
Dev: You can't.
Com: You suck.
Community: We want Splitscreen!
Dev: But you will barely use it online is where all the people are at
Com: We want Splitscreen.
Dev: Ok but its will be twice as taxing on the hardware so we will have to make the graphics worse.
Com: We want Splitscreen and the best graphics.
Dev: You can't.
Com: You suck.
Splitscreen? Why on Earth would anyone -want- to play on a split screen? I can understand wanting more games with local multiplayer, but really... who enjoys dividing their TV in half (or quarters)?
Lack of split-screen is because of one thing: Sales. Without it, you have less people mooching off of their friends to play multi-player, so everyone has to buy a copy in order to play multi. Think about the pre-online era in consoles. If your friends had video games that you wanted to play, then why bother getting them if you could just play with your friends on theirs? Now that you can't play on your friend's copy, you have to get your own in order to play with your friends. It increases sales and profits for the companies, and to me that seems to be the main motivation.
Well, aside from the fact it limits how may people you can play with, and is a bit cramped, if you happen to be on your own, you can't play it. Don't get me wrong, i have plenty of fond memories playing Goldeneye against my brother (and him hitting me for winning constantly), and Mario Kart tournaments at Uni... good times... but with online games, you can play with more friends, from further away, with less organisation involved.
I for one, welcome the popularity of online multiplayer! And Rock Band isn't split screen. but it's close... also army of two is verticaly split with two people.
:´( i still remember the endless hours me and my mates played RaC3 split screen. it was just so goddamn fun, to insult each other when we made a crappy unfair kill.
yes i know there are headsets, but whatever.
yes i know there are headsets, but whatever.
You honestly don't get it? I don't know why I bother with such subhuman intellects.HSIAMetalKing said:
First of all take note of the fact that most video game consoles can have up to four active controllers at once. Obviously some people plan to use them otherwise the inputs would be left out to save cost.
Second remember that video games and video game consoles are expensive, very few people have the desire or resources to buy more than one.
Third, while not ideal having a splitscreen multiplayer match is better than not having multiplayer match at all.
Fourth I can tell by your attitude that you're either a PC gamer or only child and are oblivious to the usefulness of splitscreen because your experience has never shown you any useful application (therefore you believe there is no useful application).
Fifth take note of the fact that I have restrained myself greatly while making this post. I have very little patience for ignorance and stupidity.
Eldritch Warlord do you actually play Local Multiplayer matches? They're terrible because of too big maps and screen peeking.
1) it takes development time to optimize the game egine to handle split screen
2) the internet
3) the mega corporations don't want people to meet face to face anymore. they only want us to communicate via their approved and monitored means of communication so that they can observe us at all times. that's why when i play videogames online i wear my tin hat so they can't read my brains.
2) the internet
3) the mega corporations don't want people to meet face to face anymore. they only want us to communicate via their approved and monitored means of communication so that they can observe us at all times. that's why when i play videogames online i wear my tin hat so they can't read my brains.
Yes I do, I've lost track of how many LAN parties I've been to/organized. Screenwatching does become a problem of sorts but I've found that the only people who can take advantage of it are probably gonna win anyway. Plus it's difficult to system link more than two Xbox's and the availability of routers makes more than four nearly impossible.shatnershaman said:
But I've had more fun at LAN parties than online multiplayer.
These are Halo parties by the way.
Joking EDIT: Oh God, the disease is more widespread than I thought! Safeguard your brains people, lest the Idiocy take hold!
Yea thats LAN I'm talking about Local (1 system) multiplayer where you only have one screen and up to a max of 4 people. That sucks balls.Eldritch Warlord said:
once i was playing 2 player versus deathmatch on some awful Army Men game with my little brother. i got tired of him screen peaking so i taped a black trash bag across the center line and hunkered underneath.shatnershaman said:
then i proceeded to snipe his ass to death until he gave up and left the room.
Actually I've played more than a few games on one system. Never very competitive but (Halo 2) King of the Hill on Beaver Creek or SWAT on Lockout or Ascension was always fun. And Glitchez, nothings more fun than going out of the map or launching people with Wraiths (for a short while).shatnershaman said:
But your right, it's always way better to have more people. That way you can justify teams and vehicles.
People like me happened to split-screen multiplayer. Unless you have an obscenely large, and by this I mean measured in feet television screen, I can track the motion on a four-player split-screen and identify familiar landmarks or powerup spawn points, even register area textures and colors to locate enemies.
It removes some of the challenge when everyone else seems honor-bound not to do this, but I can't help it. If I'm looking at a split-screen match I can tell where you are, simple as that.
Or it could have been the implementation of readily-accessible, reliable online multiplayer allowing for 16+ people to easily interface with each other, without having to worry about taking an analog stick to the frickin' eyeball for whoring energy swords.
It removes some of the challenge when everyone else seems honor-bound not to do this, but I can't help it. If I'm looking at a split-screen match I can tell where you are, simple as that.
Or it could have been the implementation of readily-accessible, reliable online multiplayer allowing for 16+ people to easily interface with each other, without having to worry about taking an analog stick to the frickin' eyeball for whoring energy swords.