Something rather stupid I've noticed is that very few games these days have any sort of decent co-op. Sure there co-op over xbox live or PSN, but some of us have real friends who want to play in the same room, on the same console, on the same TV. What's even worse is the exclusion of this mode in games that flaunt their co-op as being the best thing since sliced bananas.
In Modern Warfare 2, only one person can play xbox live or the campaign at a time (I do know there are the Spec Ops, but I don't like it when my enemies use magic, so those are out the window). Blops fixed the xbox live part, but no co-op campaign?
Borderlands is the opposite, having a great two player couch co-op; but on xbox live, only one person per xbox. How about no? How about I play on the same TV, with the same person, on the same xbox he and I just completed the campaign on? I think it's best to not advertise 4 player co-op on a game that not only doesn't support 4 players on the same xbox (fairly understandable), but can even support two on live (not even remotely understandable).
Yet another game that does this is a game my friend got (the same friend). Section 8: Prejudice. The game is fairly decent with what turned out to be a really fantastic multiplayer (really, it's better than CoD or Halo in almost every way), but it then turned out to be a bunch of dick-ticklery when my friend and I realized that the XBL multiplayer was single player per xbox, and I wasn't about to shell out $15 for a multiplayer mode (I had beaten the campaign solo, so all that was left was the MP).
Why do games do this? They could at least take the Fable 3 route and pretend one of the players doesn't exist for the purposes of cutscenes or cinematics. However, the xbox live (or PSN, whichever) multiplayer being one person per xbox is a terrible thing, and whoever thought of this should be slapped with a nine iron covered in cancer and chimpanzees.
Thoughts?
In Modern Warfare 2, only one person can play xbox live or the campaign at a time (I do know there are the Spec Ops, but I don't like it when my enemies use magic, so those are out the window). Blops fixed the xbox live part, but no co-op campaign?
Borderlands is the opposite, having a great two player couch co-op; but on xbox live, only one person per xbox. How about no? How about I play on the same TV, with the same person, on the same xbox he and I just completed the campaign on? I think it's best to not advertise 4 player co-op on a game that not only doesn't support 4 players on the same xbox (fairly understandable), but can even support two on live (not even remotely understandable).
Yet another game that does this is a game my friend got (the same friend). Section 8: Prejudice. The game is fairly decent with what turned out to be a really fantastic multiplayer (really, it's better than CoD or Halo in almost every way), but it then turned out to be a bunch of dick-ticklery when my friend and I realized that the XBL multiplayer was single player per xbox, and I wasn't about to shell out $15 for a multiplayer mode (I had beaten the campaign solo, so all that was left was the MP).
Why do games do this? They could at least take the Fable 3 route and pretend one of the players doesn't exist for the purposes of cutscenes or cinematics. However, the xbox live (or PSN, whichever) multiplayer being one person per xbox is a terrible thing, and whoever thought of this should be slapped with a nine iron covered in cancer and chimpanzees.
Thoughts?