*Rant* Lack of split-screen options these days

[ghost recon88]

Seriously, what is up with next-gen consoles and their lack of split-screen? Looking at the list of upcoming multiplayer games, and all the following lack the ability to play online split-screen:

Halo 5
Star Wars Battlefront
Rainbox Six Siege
Need for Speed

Most won't even allow local split-screen. At least the new Call of Duty has it

All these same franchises in the the past have allowed it, and these next gen consoles are supposed to be more powerful hardware-wise than the last gen. I realize online gaming and charging people $50 a year to have some sort of online membership is the new money model. Now, both you and your friends need to buy $300 consoles and $60 copies of the game just to play :twisted:

I never play any video games unless a friend is over, so I never go and play online by myself. Don't see the point, and I have more of a life than to sit online with a headset for 5 hours each night. I've heard it all, the developers saying "if we could do it, we would" well the truth is you could. If the hardware can't handle 2 separate instances of the game (like the old hardware could), then maybe you need to tone down the graphics a little, or come up with some new algorithim so the console doesn't need to run 2 instances of the game just to get split-screen working. It looks like on PS4 the only split-screen options I have are the Lego games :awe:

 

[jlee]

Seriously, what is up with next-gen consoles and their lack of split-screen? Looking at the list of upcoming multiplayer games, and all the following lack the ability to play online split-screen:

Halo 5
Star Wars Battlefront
Rainbox Six Siege
Need for Speed

Most won't even allow local split-screen. At least the new Call of Duty has it

All these same franchises in the the past have allowed it, and these next gen consoles are supposed to be more powerful hardware-wise than the last gen. I realize online gaming and charging people $50 a year to have some sort of online membership is the new money model. Now, both you and your friends need to buy $300 consoles and $60 copies of the game just to play :twisted:

I never play any video games unless a friend is over, so I never go and play online by myself. Don't see the point, and I have more of a life than to sit online with a headset for 5 hours each night. I've heard it all, the developers saying "if we could do it, we would" well the truth is you could. If the hardware can't handle 2 separate instances of the game (like the old hardware could), then maybe you need to tone down the graphics a little, or come up with some new algorithim so the console doesn't need to run 2 instances of the game just to get split-screen working. It looks like on PS4 the only split-screen options I have are the Lego games :awe:

Bingo...

 

[smackababy]

Split screen online has always been terrible. Playing Halo matchmaking and I get gamertag1 and (guest) gamertag 1 on my team and I know we are losing. There isn't a huge incentive to continue to develop these types of things. The amount of people who actually use split screen is dwindling.

 

[Ichinisan]

Played Goldeneye today on N64.

 

[Lil Frier]

Split screen online has always been terrible. Playing Halo matchmaking and I get gamertag1 and (guest) gamertag 1 on my team and I know we are losing. There isn't a huge incentive to continue to develop these types of things. The amount of people who actually use split screen is dwindling.

It hurts these devs long-term, I think. They need to build these brands with the current crop of kids. Many of them have siblings. You do this through co-op experiences. For example, my little brothers have Halo: TMCC and have played it together. I'm not sure they're going to get Halo 5 with splitscreen gone.

The problem is that when this happens, the upcoming money source isn't getting exposed to franchises that chase co-op players away. So, at least for Halo 5 (we'll see if Halo 6 optimizations bring splitscreen back), they're putting the future of the brand at risk because the teens who could latch on and buy new Xbox Ones are less likely to buy it when they can't have friends over to play, or play with their siblings.

 

[artemicion]

Split screen online has always been terrible. Playing Halo matchmaking and I get gamertag1 and (guest) gamertag 1 on my team and I know we are losing. There isn't a huge incentive to continue to develop these types of things. The amount of people who actually use split screen is dwindling.

Goes both ways in my experience. Yeah, you get a bunch of low tier casual players who play split screen, but when you get two good players split screen it can be pretty dominating. If you are good, the coordination from being in the same room + extra data/information (from peeking at the other player's screen) you get from playing with another good player split screen can be pretty dominating. My brother and his friend are both really good at Halo. They usually play online from their own houses, but if one of them happens to go over and they play split screen, they can wreck shit all day.

I actually thought this was why a lot of games don't let you play online competitively in split screen mode.

 

[VashHT]

I loved play the first GoW split-screen online with my brother and friends, then they forced you to both have gold accounts after that so we couldn't do it anymore. I was the only one with a 360 so it made 0 sense for them to get a gold account.

 

[futurefields]

The good old days right gang? No dlc bullcrap

 

[Fulle]

A lot of this is just hardware limited....

Like, with Mario Kart 8, split screen requires a drop in visual quality, then 4 player requires a halving of the FPS on top of that.... The single player runs at 60 FPS, 720p, so that's where the additional headroom was to cut from to make multiplayer possible... is in visual quality and FPS, since resolution was already as low as it could go.

When you look at an XBO or PS4 game, that's already being criticized on resolution, and FPS, it's hard to make it happen. If your game is already running at 900p 30FPS in single player mode, it might be difficult to hit 720p 30FPS in split screen with reduced visuals (shaders, etc). If that can't be pulled off, then as a dev, you're better off not doing it. Imagine the negative attention that "BigAAAGame multiplayer averages 20 FPS" would bring the game.

 

[ghost recon88]

The problem seems to be we've gotten so caught up in giga-high resolution and 60FPS, that we've outrun the hardware provided on the platform...

 

[purbeast0]

A lot of this is just hardware limited....

Like, with Mario Kart 8, split screen requires a drop in visual quality, then 4 player requires a halving of the FPS on top of that.... The single player runs at 60 FPS, 720p, so that's where the additional headroom was to cut from to make multiplayer possible... is in visual quality and FPS, since resolution was already as low as it could go.

When you look at an XBO or PS4 game, that's already being criticized on resolution, and FPS, it's hard to make it happen. If your game is already running at 900p 30FPS in single player mode, it might be difficult to hit 720p 30FPS in split screen with reduced visuals (shaders, etc). If that can't be pulled off, then as a dev, you're better off not doing it. Imagine the negative attention that "BigAAAGame multiplayer averages 20 FPS" would bring the game.

yeah i'd agree that this is one of the primary reasons.

you all remember how choppy golden eye or perfect dark got 4 player split screen? it would run like 5 fps sometimes lol. game still owned though.

 

[Lil Frier]

The problem seems to be we've gotten so caught up in giga-high resolution and 60FPS, that we've outrun the hardware provided on the platform...

So is the issue that our expectations are unrealistic relative to today's technology, or is it that these console makers skimped on hardware when you can look at even a mid-range PC that has less optimization for games and watch it vastly outperform these consoles?

We're unrealistic relative to the hardware, but that's because we didn't expect such mediocre hardware coming in. They put out consoles with GPUs running on tech that was already 2 years old, and they used budget-class CPUs and bottom-of-the-barrel storage (both in capacity and speed).

 

[JeffMD]

There are a number of reasons split screen gaming may be out the way out, for one, it was never on the way IN. Sure a number of games supported it, but more so didn't then did, and it is nonexhistant outside of consoles. There are a few technical reasons why, mainly maintaining frame rates while offering up a worthwhile experience. With the move to 16x9 gaming, top down split screen is extremely tight.

Also these days, alot of things are being cut to get the game out the door on time, in some cases the entire multiplayer component is cut. It is easy to see split screen multiplayer being one of the first on the chopping block.

 

[heymrdj]

Glad I saw this, I didn't know Halo dropped splitscreen local co-op play. Cancelled my pre-order. Not even interested in single playing through the campaign, and I don't have time to get a headset and run with want to be hero strangers online. Guess I'm done with the Halo series too. What happened to good ole fashioned games like Serious Sam.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

Here's the problems that devs usually point out.

To go split screen, you would have to sacrifice FPS and/or image quality. Then you release a game that is choppy with "crappy" graphics and people complain.

 

[ghost recon88]

Searching around I found this thread where these guys express the exact same concern as I: http://www.gamespot.com/forums/play...ch-multiplayer-on-the-ps4-is-disapp-31456893/

Guy brings up a good point at the end, Nintendo seems to be the only one who still cares about local multiplayer. Maybe I should just pick up a cheap WiiU.

 

[heymrdj]

So we need the PC master race to become popular again so that we can get high end games with quad multiplayer on big TV's again

 

[heymrdj]

Searching around I found this thread where these guys express the exact same concern as I: http://www.gamespot.com/forums/play...ch-multiplayer-on-the-ps4-is-disapp-31456893/

Guy brings up a good point at the end, Nintendo seems to be the only one who still cares about local multiplayer. Maybe I should just pick up a cheap WiiU.

Great read there. Me and the wife picked up a WiiU a few weeks ago and it has been an absolute blast, just picked up Mario Kart 8 last weekend. Been playing the new Super Mario Brothers and let me tell you that is a fantastic split screen game. Nintendo Land is also fantastic.

Haven't shown Nintendo much love in the last few years, but right now the Xbox One has been seeing dust bunnies because the Wii U has been something me and the wife can sit down and have fun. Every game we have has local co-op at minimum, and some of them have online co-op. You have to try harder to find a non-co-op game.

 

[Lil Frier]

Guy brings up a good point at the end, Nintendo seems to be the only one who still cares about local multiplayer. Maybe I should just pick up a cheap WiiU.

Tell that to Splatoon, which only offers a 1-v-1 experience locally, which is useless. Tell that to Yoshi's Woolly World, where co-op is limited to 2 players and requires you to buy an amiibo to play. Tell that to how some of their games basically spit on the WiiMotion Plus (Splatoon, Smash, even Kart, really), requiring you to go buy a new line of controllers to play.

The Wii U has probably the worst console identity crisis I've ever seen. They acted like the WiiMotion Plus was still the de facto controller, then they made the Pro controller than handles basically every game better. They went for the local co-op, then they put bad networked gaming into Kart and Smash (needs voice chat, a proper friends list, and good messaging), and then they basically made Splatoon ONLY useful for online play, but didn't give it good networking features, either. It's a mess.

 

[heymrdj]

Tell that to Splatoon, which only offers a 1-v-1 experience locally, which is useless. Tell that to Yoshi's Woolly World, where co-op is limited to 2 players and requires you to buy an amiibo to play. Tell that to how some of their games basically spit on the WiiMotion Plus (Splatoon, Smash, even Kart, really), requiring you to go buy a new line of controllers to play.

The Wii U has probably the worst console identity crisis I've ever seen. They acted like the WiiMotion Plus was still the de facto controller, then they made the Pro controller than handles basically every game better. They went for the local co-op, then they put bad networked gaming into Kart and Smash (needs voice chat, a proper friends list, and good messaging), and then they basically made Splatoon ONLY useful for online play, but didn't give it good networking features, either. It's a mess.

Wii U 4 pages: http://co-optim.us/1gZZiwC
Xbox One 2 pages: http://co-optim.us/1qN9mZy

2 people on the couch is still better than none, and in the early days it's all you had. And the controller argument is nonsense. Xbox One and Playstation 4 have controllers that are 99% the same as their predecessors but you had to shell out the cash for all new ones.

 

[Lil Frier]

Wii U 4 pages: http://co-optim.us/1gZZiwC
Xbox One 2 pages: http://co-optim.us/1qN9mZy

2 people on the couch is still better than none, and in the early days it's all you had. And the controller argument is nonsense. Xbox One and Playstation 4 have controllers that are 99% the same as their predecessors but you had to shell out the cash for all new ones.

The controller thing is TOTALLY different. I didn't buy an Xbox One, but 3 WiiMotion Plus controllers, then start watching games treat them like crap. I got a Pro controller for Smash because playing with a WMP was such an awkward pain. Splatoon doesn't even support the thing, I don't think. VERY different, because we're talking about a console turning its back on its own peripherals.

As for that pairing of lists, I can't say I care one bit. Bad games with co-op don't make good games. There are two ways I look at that list and scoff:

1. Many are games that were on the 360 (Black Ops 2 is on that list, and I'm sure it's really lame on Wii U). A World of Kelflings (which I think is available via BC on the One) also fits into that group, as does that Cabela's game, and probably a bunch others (but I'm not cross-referencing 4 pages).

2. Another good chunk (and there's probably overlap with the first) is just crappy games. Pokemon Rumble U got crap ratings. Same for Fast & Furious Showdown (also on 360), Ben 10: Omniverse, and Sonic Boom.

So much of that list is cross-generational, third-party shovelware. The Wii U had a head start, so you don't see a bunch of those 360-era games on the One's list, and with many, that's really not a loss. What it also ends up being is that there are a lot more EXPERIENCES I can have on my One than on the Wii U.

The new Rock Band won't be on Wii U, if I want it. Anything with a great online social experience won't be there (such as playing with a guest online for CoD). The FPS genre will be almost completely ignored. The greatness of the Wii U library is narrow in scope, even if it's unique. There is a big mess of platformers, then maybe 3-5 others. The Xbox One and PS4 will offer more variety and flexibility. If that means I can't play Halo 5 co-op locally, so be it. It'll suck, but I can live with it. What I can't live with is having no online experience worth being excited over, especially when pairing that with missing so many solo experiences that won't touch the Wii U, like Fallout 4 and the other massive RPGs.

 

[Fulle]

Yes, peripheral costs actually make the Wii U quite a bit more expensive than a PS4 or Xbox One. Doesn't help that software prices are also high compared to competing platforms.

The system is the best for my household in couch multiplayer though. Mario Kart 8, 3d Word, Dynasty Warriors Zelda Edition, Nintendoland, and Smash Bros, are all great fun with some company.

 

[heymrdj]

The controller thing is TOTALLY different. I didn't buy an Xbox One, but 3 WiiMotion Plus controllers, then start watching games treat them like crap. I got a Pro controller for Smash because playing with a WMP was such an awkward pain. Splatoon doesn't even support the thing, I don't think. VERY different, because we're talking about a console turning its back on its own peripherals.

As for that pairing of lists, I can't say I care one bit. Bad games with co-op don't make good games. There are two ways I look at that list and scoff:

1. Many are games that were on the 360 (Black Ops 2 is on that list, and I'm sure it's really lame on Wii U). A World of Kelflings (which I think is available via BC on the One) also fits into that group, as does that Cabela's game, and probably a bunch others (but I'm not cross-referencing 4 pages).

2. Another good chunk (and there's probably overlap with the first) is just crappy games. Pokemon Rumble U got crap ratings. Same for Fast & Furious Showdown (also on 360), Ben 10: Omniverse, and Sonic Boom.

So much of that list is cross-generational, third-party shovelware. The Wii U had a head start, so you don't see a bunch of those 360-era games on the One's list, and with many, that's really not a loss. What it also ends up being is that there are a lot more EXPERIENCES I can have on my One than on the Wii U.

The new Rock Band won't be on Wii U, if I want it. Anything with a great online social experience won't be there (such as playing with a guest online for CoD). The FPS genre will be almost completely ignored. The greatness of the Wii U library is narrow in scope, even if it's unique. There is a big mess of platformers, then maybe 3-5 others. The Xbox One and PS4 will offer more variety and flexibility. If that means I can't play Halo 5 co-op locally, so be it. It'll suck, but I can live with it. What I can't live with is having no online experience worth being excited over, especially when pairing that with missing so many solo experiences that won't touch the Wii U, like Fallout 4 and the other massive RPGs.

We're just very different in our views. Consider Forza, I think it's worthless with a controller and it shouldn't be compatible (not that they tried very hard to make it compatible!). The game is best with a wheel (a multi-hundred dollar setup at that). Is that turning it's back on the peripherals? Why is Rock Band and Guitar Hero allowed to have new peripherals and other games not?

As for the games you and I enjoy, we're obviously different. I won't even entertain playing Halo solo, same for things like Borderlands. It's no fun when every enemy is looking at you, and it takes a huge chunk of realism out when you're that loan guy taking out everything. There is 2 person couch multiplayer for every game I buy, period. If it doesn't have it, I might rent it to play through some interesting bits real fast, but it won't go into my collection. I don't have time for boring single player gaming in my life. I'm also interested in very few FPS's that don't at least have some RPG point to them, run/gun/die gets very boring very fast.

 

[tHa ShIzNiT]

We're just very different in our views. Consider Forza, I think it's worthless with a controller and it shouldn't be compatible (not that they tried very hard to make it compatible!). The game is best with a wheel (a multi-hundred dollar setup at that). Is that turning it's back on the peripherals? Why is Rock Band and Guitar Hero allowed to have new peripherals and other games not?

As for the games you and I enjoy, we're obviously different. I won't even entertain playing Halo solo, same for things like Borderlands. It's no fun when every enemy is looking at you, and it takes a huge chunk of realism out when you're that loan guy taking out everything. There is 2 person couch multiplayer for every game I buy, period. If it doesn't have it, I might rent it to play through some interesting bits real fast, but it won't go into my collection. I don't have time for boring single player gaming in my life. I'm also interested in very few FPS's that don't at least have some RPG point to them, run/gun/die gets very boring very fast.

You and I are birds of a feather, friend. This thread has been enlightening. I'm a huge fan of couch co-op seeing as I have a young son to play with.

 

[Lil Frier]

Yes, peripheral costs actually make the Wii U quite a bit more expensive than a PS4 or Xbox One. Doesn't help that software prices are also high compared to competing platforms.

The system is the best for my household in couch multiplayer though. Mario Kart 8, 3d Word, Dynasty Warriors Zelda Edition, Nintendoland, and Smash Bros, are all great fun with some company.

I agree that it's really nice for local co-op, but Nintendo's also failed itself lately with it. I'm still annoyed that Woolly World is both 2-player max AND it needs an amiibo for multiplayer (though I was going to get the $60 bundle anyway). Mario Party was a flop, and I was REALLY looking forward to it (if it were $30, rather than $35 at Best Buy this week, I might roll the dice). Splatoon murdered the local gameplay Then there's just the dearth of titles as a whole. I was hoping we'd get Mario Golf with Mario Tennis, and I prefer the former.

The upside is that Pokken Tournament is coming, and it looks sick, and Woolly World and Tennis should be a nice-enough pairing for the end of this season.

We're just very different in our views. Consider Forza, I think it's worthless with a controller and it shouldn't be compatible (not that they tried very hard to make it compatible!). The game is best with a wheel (a multi-hundred dollar setup at that). Is that turning it's back on the peripherals? Why is Rock Band and Guitar Hero allowed to have new peripherals and other games not?

As for the games you and I enjoy, we're obviously different. I won't even entertain playing Halo solo, same for things like Borderlands. It's no fun when every enemy is looking at you, and it takes a huge chunk of realism out when you're that loan guy taking out everything. There is 2 person couch multiplayer for every game I buy, period. If it doesn't have it, I might rent it to play through some interesting bits real fast, but it won't go into my collection. I don't have time for boring single player gaming in my life. I'm also interested in very few FPS's that don't at least have some RPG point to them, run/gun/die gets very boring very fast.

See, you're basically making up standards of quality, which just aren't the same. Forza might be best with a specific setup, but it was built for a controller. That's where the franchise started, and the game works just fine with a controller to this day. The input on those controllers has been tweaked, but not really changed. Those are the controllers built as the primary console input. If Forza Motorsport 7 comes out and requires a wheel to play, you'll have a point. Until then, asymmetrical analogies don't fly.

On the flip side, Nintendo started with the WiiMotion, then built games that didn't work well with it, then sold everyone Pro controllers to "fox" the issue for $50 each. The music games are different because they're not in-house creations, plus they're a genre that really can't handle a controller well. I don't fault them any more than I fault Just Dance for not playing well without Kinect. The last part is obvious--there is plenty of software to support entertainment on a basic level on the One. The Wii U is hurting for quality titles, by comparison, so when they launch their first new IP in, like, 10 years, it's pretty crappy when it requires a new controller (well, it works with the tablet, but for local multiplayer that's really lame, you'd need another $50 controller). Oh, and remember that at one point, Guitar Hero DID work with a standard controller.

Your gaming preferences really don't matter here, I wouldn't say. I'll play Halo solo, but mostly for the Solo Legendary Achievement. I play co-op with people online. Why "I don't need splitscreen" got turned to "I play alone," I'm not sure. I wouldn't play Borderlands solo, but after playing through most of 2 and a couple of hours of The Pre-Sequel (after liking the first a lot), I can also say I wouldn't play a Borderlands game ever again.

That you have a standard that eliminates Fallout, I find bizarre. Personally, I do like the solo challenge. Just as you say you don't liek being the solo killer of an army (which doesn't even happen with the A.I. team in Halo 5 in the first place), I don't love playing with infinite lives and much less challenge in co-op, where someone can serve as a spawn point in cover and it's incredibly easy to steamroll just about everything with two people (as if TWO people defeating a whole army is the magic line to realism).