*Rant* Lack of split-screen options these days

[PliotronX]

I've been looking into this as well because SS and local co-op in general were the main draws of consoles. What's the point of playing games on hardware incapable of maintaining good framerates/high LoD and craptastical GUIs when you can't have fun with folks in the same room? Lazy devs man... smh

 

[Lil Frier]

You're just picking a person to blame at random, I think. These consoles are running on low-end hardware. It's not like devs can turn the poor hardware into great visuals with ease. I mean, Forza and Halo both look really good, it's just that the budget-class CPU and 3-year-old (or more) GPU aren't going to push modern gaming that hard. We kind of got the hardware shaft this generation, and you can probably thank Nintendo's hardware profits (in part) for that.

 

[heymrdj]

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.



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).

My analogy was spot on. I don't know about Splatoon, but Smash Bro. and Kart I own and play with my old wii motion plus controllers without issue. Is it as good as a Pro controller? No. Same for Forza. Forza with controllers shouldn't exist, but it does to appeal to the masses. It works, just not great.

As for the remarks about solo, like I said different gamers. There's an entire book of tacticality that you can't do solo, requires at least 2 people to do. Being tactical, sweeping rooms and what not, that's fun to me. And to me doing that online with someone I don't know is worthless to me. They don't coordinate, most are 10 year old wanna be heros, or 40 year olds with kids that are having to stop every 20 minutes to help cook dinner or get the kids to stop doing something. My wife, my partner, plays the games with me like a boss and we're on the same wavelength. We'll play with more people online, but coordinating a co-op is way easier in person. When Halo 3 came out, my friends came over to play co-op, yelling into a headset, everyone talking over each other is just disconnected.

And my wife enjoyed fallout, she plays some single player games. For me my interest is immediately killed just by playing by myself. She's preordered 4. I haven't had a chance to play fallout, I'm sure I'll give it a try when 4 comes in.

I enjoy social and interactive games. I want an experience. If I want just the story, I'll read the book.

 

[ghost recon88]

You're just picking a person to blame at random, I think. These consoles are running on low-end hardware. It's not like devs can turn the poor hardware into great visuals with ease. I mean, Forza and Halo both look really good, it's just that the budget-class CPU and 3-year-old (or more) GPU aren't going to push modern gaming that hard. We kind of got the hardware shaft this generation, and you can probably thank Nintendo's hardware profits (in part) for that.

I guess the question becomes, why do we need some epic visuals? While I don't consider the Wii or N64 to have great visuals by any means, I still think that the gameplay on those is a load better than this current gens multiplayer.

 

[purbeast0]

saying a racing game shouldn't exist without a wheel is about as retarded as you can get. the racing formula has been around for decades and worked just fine with controllers.

thats like saying fps games shouldn't exist without a light gun. just stupid.

 

[artemicion]

Wii U is a beast for couch multiplayer. Knocking it because two games have less than ideal multiplayer support is asinine. It still has way more (and arguably way better) couch multiplayer options than PS4 and XB1.

And while the Wii-mote may be a less than ideal gaming controller, it's dirt a$$ cheap. I can pick up four (!!!!) wii-motes on Craigslist for like $25. Boom. Instant multiplayer party. PS4 and XB1 remotes are 4x the cost of that. Who the hell cares if they aren't ideal gaming controllers. I've got one pro controller for when I play solo, and 3x wiimotes for multiplayer. Nobody complains.

 

[PliotronX]

I guess the question becomes, why do we need some epic visuals? While I don't consider the Wii or N64 to have great visuals by any means, I still think that the gameplay on those is a load better than this current gens multiplayer.

That's what I am thinking. Fun doesn't always include epic visuals, particularly in multiplayer. On the PC, I will go to low detail just for easier visibility and better performance/responsiveness/aiming. My point is that if the devs are not even looking at it from the perspective of enjoying gameplay with people on the same couch, they are going about it wrong. Perhaps the publishers yank the leash on time spent on certain features but this makes me appreciate console games less. We've had local multiplayer on consoles since the Atari and all of a sudden they don't consider it worth investing time into? Why? That's all I would like to know.

 

[Lil Frier]

Wii U is a beast for couch multiplayer. Knocking it because two games have less than ideal multiplayer support is asinine. It still has way more (and arguably way better) couch multiplayer options than PS4 and XB1.

And while the Wii-mote may be a less than ideal gaming controller, it's dirt a$$ cheap. I can pick up four (!!!!) wii-motes on Craigslist for like $25. Boom. Instant multiplayer party. PS4 and XB1 remotes are 4x the cost of that. Who the hell cares if they aren't ideal gaming controllers. I've got one pro controller for when I play solo, and 3x wiimotes for multiplayer. Nobody complains.

Yes, I knock the Wii U because the games I wanted didn't turn out the way I wanted.

I was REALLY excited to get Mario Party 10, then they butchered the game, and so that's one major release I lost. I liked playing NSMBU locally with my sister and brother-in-law. I wanted to do that with Super Mario Maker, but it's solo-only content, making it useless to me. Again, I like playing with two other people, so having Donkey Kong (expected, since that's how those games always were) and Yoshi limit people to two players (the latter requiring an amiibo to play co-op...) hurt. Splatoon might have intrigued, but the networked gaming on the Wii U is garbage, and local multiplayer is pointless.

So yes, it's going to get my attention in a bad way when 5 games (3 I really liked) end up crappy on a console with MAYBE 10 games total that interest me.

That's what I am thinking. Fun doesn't always include epic visuals, particularly in multiplayer. On the PC, I will go to low detail just for easier visibility and better performance/responsiveness/aiming. My point is that if the devs are not even looking at it from the perspective of enjoying gameplay with people on the same couch, they are going about it wrong. Perhaps the publishers yank the leash on time spent on certain features but this makes me appreciate console games less. We've had local multiplayer on consoles since the Atari and all of a sudden they don't consider it worth investing time into? Why? That's all I would like to know.

So in one comment, you went from "we don't have splitscreen because of lazy devs" to "we don't have splitscreen because devs try too hard." Some on, man.

End of the day, there's a lot of money in getting people online. The hardware makers make more money from their online subscriptions. The publishers and devs get people looking at that multiplayer DLC that is overpriced as all get out, by having them continuing to play online for longer than a campaign lasts. That keeps the franchise in players' minds long-term, so you end up with the annualized juggernaut of Call of Duty.

The people who grew up with gaming have simply spread out from their friends. They are the primary income for those devs, they generate more sales than the couples who play together or the kids who are only buying one copy for two people to play. So, they focus on keeping those older people with more income and friends all over the country paying money.

 

[PliotronX]

So in one comment, you went from "we don't have splitscreen because of lazy devs" to "we don't have splitscreen because devs try too hard." Some on, man.

End of the day, there's a lot of money in getting people online. The hardware makers make more money from their online subscriptions. The publishers and devs get people looking at that multiplayer DLC that is overpriced as all get out, by having them continuing to play online for longer than a campaign lasts. That keeps the franchise in players' minds long-term, so you end up with the annualized juggernaut of Call of Duty.

The people who grew up with gaming have simply spread out from their friends. They are the primary income for those devs, they generate more sales than the couples who play together or the kids who are only buying one copy for two people to play. So, they focus on keeping those older people with more income and friends all over the country paying money.

Your theory is baseless and reading comprehension requires work. Who is creating the games? Who are making the mistakes? Try again. Only gaming online must be a lonely life...

 

[Fulle]

That's what I am thinking. Fun doesn't always include epic visuals, particularly in multiplayer. On the PC, I will go to low detail just for easier visibility and better performance/responsiveness/aiming. My point is that if the devs are not even looking at it from the perspective of enjoying gameplay with people on the same couch, they are going about it wrong. Perhaps the publishers yank the leash on time spent on certain features but this makes me appreciate console games less. We've had local multiplayer on consoles since the Atari and all of a sudden they don't consider it worth investing time into? Why? That's all I would like to know.

Why? Hmm. Logic would dictate that a business, whose sole purpose is to make money, would be be basing decisions on what makes them the most profit.

30 FPS games with fantastic visuals, must sell better than 60 FPS games with less impressive graphics. Local multiplayer must not be important enough to sales to be a priority feature, since so many games are cutting it.

Part of the reason for this might be that the average age of a gamer is somewhere between 30-35 now, depending on what study you want to use statistics from. People that age do tend to move away from the friends they would do couch co-op with, and play online instead... but, with most gaming households in the big gaming markets having sufficient internet connections now, online gaming is also very common with gamers under 30...

None of the above is the same as me saying that I don't enjoy couch co-op. I do, actually, and that's a reason why I own a Wii U.... That said though, I can just look at people around me in my own life, and understand that many people I know have shifted to almost entirely online multiplayer vs local.

 

[bystander36]

As a PC gamer, who only occasionally play consoles when at get togethers, this revelation kills all desire to get a console. The biggest things consoles had over PC's was their split screen play. It was fun going head to head with friends and family in person. A lot of fun.

 

[JeffMD]

I have to agree with everything lil frier has said. The wiiu "may" ace couch multiplayer, but it still doesn't stop the fact that most of its library still sucks, and that OTHER experiences aside from couch multiplayer are better on other systems. And if you want to point at multi player in general, the online multi play support on the wiiu is so weak that it gets knocked to the back of the pack again.

as for the Forza argument, ASIDE from the fact we have been playing racing games with nintendo pads and keyboards for decades, the xbox and ps controllers both have analog controls and motion controls. That is more then enough for a good experience. -_-

bystander, I have allways hated split screen. Smash bros and single screen fighters are awesome. 2 player racing I can live with cause you don't have to pay much attention to the y Axis. But first person shooters are just horrible when you are playing in that small box with distractions all around you. Even worse when you are trying to kill each other.

 

[heymrdj]

I have to agree with everything lil frier has said. The wiiu "may" ace couch multiplayer, but it still doesn't stop the fact that most of its library still sucks, and that OTHER experiences aside from couch multiplayer are better on other systems. And if you want to point at multi player in general, the online multi play support on the wiiu is so weak that it gets knocked to the back of the pack again.

as for the Forza argument, ASIDE from the fact we have been playing racing games with nintendo pads and keyboards for decades, the xbox and ps controllers both have analog controls and motion controls. That is more then enough for a good experience. -_-

bystander, I have allways hated split screen. Smash bros and single screen fighters are awesome. 2 player racing I can live with cause you don't have to pay much attention to the y Axis. But first person shooters are just horrible when you are playing in that small box with distractions all around you. Even worse when you are trying to kill each other.

And the WiiU games support the old motion plus controllers and play them just fine. It's the SAME ARGUMENT. You don't NEED new peripherals to play the new WiiU games.

And the fact that someone's brain is honestly too derp to play side by side without distracting itself is lolz to me.

 

[Lil Frier]

And the WiiU games support the old motion plus controllers and play them just fine. It's the SAME ARGUMENT. You don't NEED new peripherals to play the new WiiU games.

And the fact that someone's brain is honestly too derp to play side by side without distracting itself is lolz to me.

Don't you need new hardware for local Splatoon multiplayer? It doesn't support the WiiMotion, I don't think.

 

[artemicion]

Yes, I knock the Wii U because the games I wanted didn't turn out the way I wanted.

I was REALLY excited to get Mario Party 10, then they butchered the game, and so that's one major release I lost. I liked playing NSMBU locally with my sister and brother-in-law. I wanted to do that with Super Mario Maker, but it's solo-only content, making it useless to me. Again, I like playing with two other people, so having Donkey Kong (expected, since that's how those games always were) and Yoshi limit people to two players (the latter requiring an amiibo to play co-op...) hurt. Splatoon might have intrigued, but the networked gaming on the Wii U is garbage, and local multiplayer is pointless.

So yes, it's going to get my attention in a bad way when 5 games (3 I really liked) end up crappy on a console with MAYBE 10 games total that interest me.

Meh, if you don't like the games on Wii U, I'm not going to try to change your mind. All I know is that *I* liked them and it has way more couch multiplayer games than any other platform I own (PS4/XB1/PC). So it's the king of couch multiplayer for me.

Oh, and Yoshi doesn't require amiibo for co-op. And networked gaming on Splatoon is just fine.

 

[Lil Frier]

Meh, if you don't like the games on Wii U, I'm not going to try to change your mind. All I know is that *I* liked them and it has way more couch multiplayer games than any other platform I own (PS4/XB1/PC). So it's the king of couch multiplayer for me.

Oh, and Yoshi doesn't require amiibo for co-op. And networked gaming on Splatoon is just fine.

Well, "I like them," certainly won't change my mind, haha.

I misunderstood what the amiibo did in YWW. It's for Double Yoshi mode playing solo, which is quite useful, but not essential. I picked up the $60 bundle with the green amiibo. I gave my sister the green Yoshi, bot a blue for myself, and picked up a Dr. Mario for my brother-in-law at Target (he's a for-real doctor, so it was appropriate). I like the game well enough, though it's a bit too easy for me to REALLY like it (still on World 1, maybe it ramps up a bit). My biggest complaint is that they skimped on amiibo functionality. Specifically, why don't the Pokemon amiibo give you new patterns? My sister really wanted a Pikachu Yoshi, and I wanted Charizard.

As for Splatoon, that's your opinion. Me, a game built for online play with no reals means of communication is absurd. In the same vein, I was pleasantly surprised by the Battlefront beta. I was leaning towards getting he game, but after they announced that there is no game chat (all chat is through Party Chat), while then promoting a game mode as relying heavily on communication, I wrote the game off. 2015, and no in-game voice chat? Sounds like a rushed, lazy hack job from DICE again. For Nintendo, it just looks like another piece of evidence that they don't get networked gaming.

 

[artemicion]

Well, "I like them," certainly won't change my mind, haha.

I'm not going to try to change your mind because most of your complaints are subjective complaints re: design decisions that can be justified. Most of the games you complained about are actually great games, they just weren't designed with your personal preferences in mind. Which is fine. You're allowed to have your own personal preferences. Game designers are allowed to design games catered toward other people.

Yoshi and Splatoon are good examples: you think Yoshi is too easy, a lot of casual gamers probably think it's just right. You think Splatoon needs voice chat, a lot of casual gamers find voice chat to be obnoxious (myself included-I can mute obnoxious voice chatters, but I also like the fact that it creates a more casual atmosphere and there's less chance of getting railroaded by super serious voice chat teams. Most games have teams composed of individuals doing their own thing--like me. No super serious clans and whatnot. I can't get that via a mute button).

 

[Lil Frier]

Well, my problem arises that one side gets an option and the other gets shafted. If Splatoon had voice chat, you could choose to turn it off. With it missing, I can't choose to add it. If you want a casual experience or a more-hardcore one, they could have ranked and unranked lobbies, like Halo offers. Yoshi has two modes, and I play on the Classic Mode, supposedly the harder of the two. My complaint was that IT is too easy, especially when they have the casual-geared Mellow Mode.

So, it just ends up being that Nintendo's not giving people a choice, that's what I don't like. As you said, it's all preference, but Nintendo's designs are locking out preference and potential customers. Most other games give people options to appeal to those who have different styles of play, but not Nintendo, who has often been very rigid in just about everything as it is.

 

[sxr7171]

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.

They are nuts if they expect every household to give each child a separate TV and Console and copy of the game and online subscription. I have a feeling they are really mostly targeting working adults these days.

If they do this the next generation of people will not give two hoots over console gaming and we too will end up like Japan playing $5 games on our phones. Serves these greedy pigs right. Which is also why they like pushing the stupid voice activated TV channel changing features. Next gen Roku and Apple TV will show them there are more efficient ways to do a set top box than a big honking console.

 

[Lil Frier]

I mean, no. For starters, everyone on a console with a Gold sub can use it. So, one $60 sub (or cheaper, if you get it on-sale) can be used on every Xbox One account on that console. If you have 2 consoles in the house, the "Home console" trick should still make it viable.

As for that other paragraph, this isn't exactly greed. Remember that 343 is giving out all maps (minimum 18) for free in this game.

 

[artemicion]

Well, my problem arises that one side gets an option and the other gets shafted. If Splatoon had voice chat, you could choose to turn it off. With it missing, I can't choose to add it. If you want a casual experience or a more-hardcore one, they could have ranked and unranked lobbies, like Halo offers. Yoshi has two modes, and I play on the Classic Mode, supposedly the harder of the two. My complaint was that IT is too easy, especially when they have the casual-geared Mellow Mode.

So, it just ends up being that Nintendo's not giving people a choice, that's what I don't like. As you said, it's all preference, but Nintendo's designs are locking out preference and potential customers. Most other games give people options to appeal to those who have different styles of play, but not Nintendo, who has often been very rigid in just about everything as it is.

I'm pretty sure we've had this debate re: Splatoon voice chat before, I really don't feel any desire to go back into it. I'll just say that the absence of voice chat suits my preferences, and it's not as simple as me having the option to mute it. No voice chat creates a more casual online player base with almost zero chance of running into a highly coordinated, hardcore team. I like that. Sure, they could throw in an option of two different online play modes, but that would splinter the online community. The option comes at a cost. They decided they don't want to pay that cost, which I think is a justifiable decision. If you want hardcore, coordinated games with voice chat, you have plenty of them, just not Splatoon.

 

[Lil Frier]

Of course, the alternative is splintering the community by keeping those who want voice chat from getting the game altogether.

And on the Wii U, that last point's really untrue. The hardcore, team-based, online-enabled games are nonexistent, basically. No CoD, no Halo alternative, none of that stuff. Not even the major sports franchises.