Relatively Epic

stealth toilet

Moderator
I know most of you have heard me complain, on numerous accounts, about the lack of split screen multiplayer found in today's average game. I understand that online is a much more convenient way to play, but other options of playing the game should always be included, just in case the opportunity to take advantage of those options arises.

Such was the case today with Gears of War 2. With no less than 4 TV's, 4 360's, 4 copies of Gears 2, and 8 controllers, my friends and I managed to assemble for a day of LANtastic awesomeness. We played Guardian, mixing and matching teams and arenas, for about 10 hours straight, and the intensity never lessened throughout. It was easily one of the most fun times I've ever had playing video games, multiplayer or otherwise. One round of victory would bring excessive feelings of comradery and jubilation, while the next crushing defeat would bring bouts of cursing in between heavy moments of silence. Taunts and insults were thrown around liberally, strategies and opponent positions were yelled out with frequency, fisticuffs were threatened, rewards offered, and so on, for hour after hour.

This day, alone, made the 2 player splitscreen LAN option on Gears 2 well worth the price of the game (or in the case of my friends who took on the burden of obtaining the fourth copy, well worth the price of 2 games), and if ever there has been evidence of a need to include this option in more games, this day was it.

Yes there are people who will go to the excessive lengths needed in order to organize a gaming-fest of this magnitude, and we do this because it is simply the best way to play multiplayer games.

Good God that was fun. :D
 
Splitscreen would be so cool for a lot of games. And a lot of games should be multiplayer online. Oblivion.
 
I so agree with you on that Stealth. The lack of split screen really ruins the fun for most games and I don't see why there isn't any to begin with, seeing that it could attract more poeple with it.
 
I believe that split-screen should only be in games that would be logical to play split-screen, much like Gears. However, some games should just be left to single player.
 
Like the sims 2. Their splitscreen SUCKS! It is split DIAGONAL!! Truly awful. I spelled diagonal right!
 
Jared said:
Like the sims 2. Their splitscreen SUCKS! It is split DIAGONAL!! Truly awful. I spelled diagonal right!

Idk, y'know.. I quite like the diagonal split on The Sims. Seems to just go well..
 
As much as I had lots of fun playing split-screen multiplayer in the past, I refuse to share my screen now. If there's a LAN party and we each had a screen, then that's fine, but I won't share my screen. I'll probably be in the minority on this but I can't go back. It just won't be fun for me anymore.
 
My friend jordan(i mooch his xbox360), he demands to be top screen, so it is relitively the same thing. Sorta.
 
CreepinDeth said:
As much as I had lots of fun playing split-screen multiplayer in the past, I refuse to share my screen now. If there's a LAN party and we each had a screen, then that's fine, but I won't share my screen. I'll probably be in the minority on this but I can't go back. It just won't be fun for me anymore.

But isn't playing a match of CoD4 with 3 other people more fun than with just 1 other person? And wouldn't it be even more fun to play with 7 other people instead of just 1 other person? Is having a full screen per console really worth sacrificing the potential for 6 other people, in the same room, to join in on the fun? And isn't it also a lot easier on the wallet to buy a few extra controllers, and one or two extra copies of a game, than it is to buy 8 consoles/copies of the game?

I would say that: playing with other people > having a full screen. But that's just me, and I enjoy fun. :D
 
I enjoy fun, that I can see. :lol

I hate sharing a screen with 3 other people and saying "what...what was that? I can't even see that. Can someone tell me how much ammo I have?"
 
stealth toilet said:
But isn't playing a match of CoD4 with 3 other people more fun than with just 1 other person? And wouldn't it be even more fun to play with 7 other people instead of just 1 other person? Is having a full screen per console really worth sacrificing the potential for 6 other people, in the same room, to join in on the fun? And isn't it also a lot easier on the wallet to buy a few extra controllers, and one or two extra copies of a game, than it is to buy 8 consoles/copies of the game?

I would say that: playing with other people > having a full screen. But that's just me, and I enjoy fun. :D

That's what Xbox Live is for. Online play has spoiled me and since there is voice chat, in my opinion, it's just as good as having someone there. Plus with Xbox Live, I can play with more than just 8 people.
 
stealth toilet said:
But isn't playing a match of CoD4 with 3 other people more fun than with just 1 other person? And wouldn't it be even more fun to play with 7 other people instead of just 1 other person? Is having a full screen per console really worth sacrificing the potential for 6 other people, in the same room, to join in on the fun? And isn't it also a lot easier on the wallet to buy a few extra controllers, and one or two extra copies of a game, than it is to buy 8 consoles/copies of the game?

I would say that: playing with other people > having a full screen. But that's just me, and I enjoy fun. :D

agreed 100%.....

even if voice chat is there is just not the same as just hanging out with friends in the same room... it doesn't have the same feeling... after every game you can see their funny stances or someone do something funny that cannot be heard.... (as an ASL student i know what i mean when i say that visual can be more fun than audio) sometimes someone might say "oh crap my cat just did something funny" and then tries to explain it... and it just is not as funny as actually being there (it's just an example)

as gamers we shared our screen for many many years and i personally never had a problem with it. even with the small Tv i used to have, playing star fox 64 with other people was never an issue for me, i guess i never really had an issue with sharing my screen, i never really thought it was something bad because i can have fun with my friends that i invited over, and we can buy any game we have because we only need one copy.... with on-line when some people decide to play a different game and someone doesn't have the game that was chosen.... then that person might feel left out.

i don't mind on-line, in fact the only way for me to play with my old venezuelan friends/family is with on-line.... but it is just not the same as having a party at my own house... sharing a screen is a very small price to pay..
 
CreepinDeth said:
That's what Xbox Live is for. Online play has spoiled me and since there is voice chat, in my opinion, it's just as good as having someone there.

Interesting.

As I muddled over several retorts to this statement a thought occurred that might save us both a good deal of time. For myself, the action of getting together with people and hanging out is complimented by video games, not the other way around. First and foremost I look for a social experience, and then secondary to that is the game (or reason) that the social experience is centered around. The experience I want to have is a social one, not a virtual one, and so I don't mind having an inferior virtual experience, because the social experience I'm having with friends is superior than if I was playing by myself.

Additionally, playing online is no substitute for split screen play, even with the voice chat option, and not for the reasons Zi stated (valid though they may be). Again, if we had 8 360's, 8 copies of one game, and 8 TVs, then LANning one person per console wouldn't be as big a deal (it would still be a really big hassle though). But we don't. Believe it or not there are people out there (like me) who enjoy playing video games a lot, but simply don't have the money to afford the ideal setup (latest console, HDTV, surround sound, games, online accounts, etc.). Having split screen just erases the barriers of entry for multiplayer games, because instead of 8 individuals having to shell out 500$ + each for a console, online account, and game (and an extra 60$ per person for every game after that) just to play together, they could easily get 2 360 consoles, 2 copies of the game, and 8 controllers, for a fraction of the price.

So I do take issue with the notion that online + voice chat is >= split screen, because I really don't believe that to be the case. Its prone to lag, poor matchmaking technology, dropped games, playing with people you'd rather not, inferior social experience, and it costs exponentially more than the split screen alternative. All that for a few extra inches of peripheral vision?
 
stealth toilet said:
All that for a few extra inches of peripheral vision?

Yes.

Also, I thought about this some more too and one possible conclusion I came up with could be the age difference. When I was younger I had much more fun playing split screen, but now it has lost most of its charm. I agree online is not perfect by any means, but is much more convenient in a sense. For instance, in my case, a lot of my friends don't necessarily live near me. The commute can become a hassle and why waste fuel when you can just play online and not leave your home? The cost of fuel is going up so you can factor that in to my equation on top of everything else. Also, we all have our individual lives with work, family (by family I mean having a spouse and child(ren)) and whatnot. Sometimes heading over someones house is not always feasible. So the price of online doesn't seem so bad. It actually feels more of a bargain.

I have had times where a bunch of friends and I played splitscreen recently, but mostly it was more of a distraction than the actual focus. Just something to kill time. Also note, that most of my friends are 25 and older. In the end, I'd rather sit on my own couch with my own 32" HDTV and play than to have everyone over just to play a game.
 
Actually, some games actually give you /more/ vision.

It's been proven that Halo 3's 2-player splitscreen has a larger field of vision than a single-player screen. Not even kidding.

Anyway, though, I agree. I get more upset about not being able to play split-screen online, though... it's annoying. Halo 3 does it perfectly... games like Call of Duty 3 do it horribly, though. Most games don't have it at all. :(
 
CreepinDeth said:
Yes.

Also, I thought about this some more too and one possible conclusion I came up with could be the age difference. When I was younger I had much more fun playing split screen, but now it has lost most of its charm. I agree online is not perfect by any means, but is much more convenient in a sense. For instance, in my case, a lot of my friends don't necessarily live near me. The commute can become a hassle and why waste fuel when you can just play online and not leave your home? The cost of fuel is going up so you can factor that in to my equation on top of everything else. Also, we all have our individual lives with work, family (by family I mean having a spouse and child(ren)) and whatnot. Sometimes heading over someones house is not always feasible. So the price of online doesn't seem so bad. It actually feels more of a bargain.

I have had times where a bunch of friends and I played splitscreen recently, but mostly it was more of a distraction than the actual focus. Just something to kill time. Also note, that most of my friends are 25 and older. In the end, I'd rather sit on my own couch with my own 32" HDTV and play than to have everyone over just to play a game.

Yeah, that's true too. 3 or 4 nights out of the week I usually find myself at a friend's place (less so when school is on, but when I do get a free evening to do what I want then its guaranteed I'll be with friends) regardless of whether or not we're playing video games. That is part and parcel with the college/university atmosphere, and once I, and my friends, hit the working world permanently I do foresee that changing. Its a discouraging thought to realize that a few years will drastically change the lifestyle I lead, and online gaming may indeed become the norm. Currently, I also am fortunate to have a good deal of friends live within walking distance of where I live, so it doesn't cost me anything to "commute" to their places. Again, a few years may very well see my friends and I living in different cities, at which time online will be optimal.

kirbyrockz said:
Anyway, though, I agree. I get more upset about not being able to play split-screen online, though... it's annoying. Halo 3 does it perfectly... games like Call of Duty 3 do it horribly, though. Most games don't have it at all. :(

Halo 2 was the best for that. Nowadays Xbox Live is tied to profiles, not consoles, so every person who plays online needs to have an active gold account. Back in the day of Halo 2, 4 people could play online together so long as the console they were playing on had Live, which friggin ruled.

*Sigh*

It's another unfortunate thought to think the best days of multiplayer gaming are behind me. Online is a nice substitute when convenience is an issue, but... *sigh* :lol
 
stealth toilet said:
Halo 2 was the best for that. Nowadays Xbox Live is tied to profiles, not consoles, so every person who plays online needs to have an active gold account. Back in the day of Halo 2, 4 people could play online together so long as the console they were playing on had Live, which friggin ruled.

You do know that still works right? I can jump on Halo 3 with 1 Xbox Live account and the other 3 can join me easily without needing a gold account, as long as it's on the same TV.
 
stealth toilet said:
Yeah, that's true too. 3 or 4 nights out of the week I usually find myself at a friend's place (less so when school is on, but when I do get a free evening to do what I want then its guaranteed I'll be with friends) regardless of whether or not we're playing video games. That is part and parcel with the college/university atmosphere, and once I, and my friends, hit the working world permanently I do foresee that changing. Its a discouraging thought to realize that a few years will drastically change the lifestyle I lead, and online gaming may indeed become the norm. Currently, I also am fortunate to have a good deal of friends live within walking distance of where I live, so it doesn't cost me anything to "commute" to their places. Again, a few years may very well see my friends and I living in different cities, at which time online will be optimal.

Halo 2 was the best for that. Nowadays Xbox Live is tied to profiles, not consoles, so every person who plays online needs to have an active gold account. Back in the day of Halo 2, 4 people could play online together so long as the console they were playing on had Live, which friggin ruled.

*Sigh*

It's another unfortunate thought to think the best days of multiplayer gaming are behind me. Online is a nice substitute when convenience is an issue, but... *sigh* :lol

just because you guys are getting old doesn't mean Developers can take the privileges of regular multiplayer away from the younger generations.... :lol so i still support Split-screen no matter what

(i mean it in the nicest way possible)

besides i don't know if the culture is that different in America but in my country we get together very often.... my parents and grandparents have tons of BBQs and get-togethers with their friends.
 
Zidart said:
just because you guys are getting old doesn't mean Developers can take the privileges of regular multiplayer away from the younger generations.... :lol so i still support Split-screen no matter what

True, but you also have to remember it is a business and, if I'm not mistaken, the older crowd is bringing in the most money. A crowd that mostly plays online.
 
MegaDrive20XX said:
You do know that still works right? I can jump on Halo 3 with 1 Xbox Live account and the other 3 can join me easily without needing a gold account, as long as it's on the same TV.

Are you sure? The only time I can remember playing splitscreen Halo 3 online was when we have free 1 month trials of Xbox Live for each account. Once one of those expired, that person could no longer play online with the rest. I may be mistaken though, in fact I really hope I am. I know for a fact that if indeed that is the case, Halo 3 is the exception to the rule. Still, I would like to find out if that's still possible on Halo 3.
 
Back
Top