Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
PlayStation (Games) The Internet Wii XBox (Games) Games

Split Screen Co-op Is Dying 362

Posted by Soulskill
from the just-like-lan-parties dept.
kube00 writes "Split-screen co-op and local multiplayer are becoming things of the past. What happened to cramming a bunch of gamers into a room with two TVs and doing a system link match in Halo? Where have the all-night GoldenEye matches gone? Like the arcades of gamers' youth, the local multiplayer and co-op bonding experience has been replaced with individual gamers and a network."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Split Screen Co-op Is Dying

Comments Filter:
  • Damned shame (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nursie (632944) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @04:45AM (#34625994)

    Split-screen co-op is a sociable way to spend an evening with a mate or two (drop in a few beers too, of course).

    I was most upset when it wasn't included in Resistance 2, after Resistance 1 had it. Turned it from an awesome shared experience to taking turns and one of you being a bit bored.

  • Grown Ups. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Seumas (6865) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @04:47AM (#34625998)

    When you grow up, you find that you have less time for gaming. You find that some of your friends and colleagues stop gaming, because of life. Of those who still game, you have fragmentation among their preferred platforms and then fragmentation among the games they invest their time in. If you've managed to find one or two like-minded folk who happen to want to play the same game on the same platform, you have to deal with aligning everyone's schedules so that they can get together. Then, you get to lug some hardware around and rearrange furniture.

    It's far easier to just have a seat on the couch or office chair and make use of that thing called the "Internet".

  • Re:What? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Seumas (6865) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @04:51AM (#34626016)

    Why, when I was a kid, young people socialized around burgers and malts at the local grease pit. And the burgers were a nickel. And we respected our elders.

  • Split screen? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Endymion (12816) <slashdot@org.thoughtnoise@net> on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @04:52AM (#34626018) Homepage Journal

    You don't need to split the screen to play Contra!

    Proper co-op should be one screen.

  • Do the math (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Erbo (384) <obreerboNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @04:53AM (#34626028) Homepage Journal
    Split-screen multiplayer: Requires 1 console, plus 1 copy of the game.

    Online multiplayer: Requires N consoles, plus N copies of the game, plus N online service subscription fees.

    Which scenario do you think the console and game manufacturers like better?

  • by Fallus Shempus (793462) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @06:23AM (#34626432) Homepage
    No, but there are plenty of 35 year olds who have kids that want to play (Lego Star Wars etc sell well enough, and even up to Halo).

    My eldest loves killing all the brutes while I'm still trying to figure out where they are... "It's OK Dad I'll let you kill the next one"

    Also there are some wives/girlfriends who sometimes play.
  • Re:Grown Ups. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by xouumalperxe (815707) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @08:35AM (#34626958)

    If you've managed to find one or two like-minded folk who happen to want to play the same game on the same platform, you have to deal with aligning everyone's schedules so that they can get together. Then, you get to lug some hardware around and rearrange furniture.

    You got it completely wrong. If I own a console, a game, and two controllers, and the game supports split-screen (or, more generically, local multiplayer with just one screen -- most beat'em ups don't really split screen), we can play the game together. There's no "happen to want to play the same game on the same platform" here, it's a matter of "people are here, they feel like playing a game, these are the ones I have that work". And this is why the Wii got its reputation for "the console for people who have actual friends": if someone visits me and they enjoy games, Mario Kart, New Super Mario Bros, House of the Dead: Overkill, Super Smash Bros. and Wii Sports are all games we can just pick up and play (and those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head from my own collection, without going into the Guitar Hero or Raving Rabbids sort of games). While not exactly a "hardcore" gaming experience, being able to push the controller off my opponent's hand while I try to overtake them in Mario Kart is a much more satisfying social experience than calling out "owned" over Ventrilo :)

  • Re:Damned shame (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AltairDusk (1757788) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @09:39AM (#34627286)

    Did you ever play video games with friends when you were a kid? I remember playing Goldeneye with 3 friends split screen on a 15" TV and we managed just fine. Playing 2 way or 4 way split screen on the 46" LCD I have now would still beat playing one player on that tiny screen for each person playing.

    I suspect the real reason split screen is disappearing is that both the PS3 and the 360 have already been pushed to their hardware limits and the game devs are having difficulty making split screen run without killing the framerate or dropping down the graphics level.

  • Re:Damned shame (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Bitcloud21 (1492275) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @10:08AM (#34627538)

    I would argue that this is the exact reason that split-screen is still necessary because without split-screen, then the person must to be in a different building with their own system and copy of the game.

    It is nice to be able to still play with someone even when they cannot be right next to you, but there is no substitute to seeing your friends face right after you dominate them in some sweet split-screen.

    Removing split-screen removes part of the social aspect of games.

  • Re:Damned shame (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Rexdude (747457) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @11:50AM (#34628760)

    No. David Wong said it best [cracked.com]:

    The advantage that consoles have over, say, PCs, is that you can play from your comfy sofa. The reason the sofa is considered the pinnacle of furniture technology is because there's room for other people on it.

    Yet, here's Grand Theft Auto IV, boasting about its robust multiplayer, and if you think "multiplayer" means inviting the gang over to play, get drunk, laugh and high-five each other until the break of dawn, too bad. You can't do that. Want to play with friends, they must be kept at arm's length, faceless at the other end of a broadband connection. Grand Theft Auto IV multiplayer is a world without hugs.

    A little further down, the reason:

    Sorry, you know damned well that technical limitations aren't the reason everyone is dropping split screen. Every previous generation had it, in times with much less powerful systems and few widescreen TVs.
    You're dropping it because four players on a split screen are playing off one $60 copy of the game. Four players playing online need four copies ($240).

  • Re:Damned shame (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @12:12PM (#34629108) Homepage
    Defend yourself. If you can't or won't fight for yourself, then I see no reason to fight for you.
  • Re:Damned shame (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) on Tuesday December 21, 2010 @12:46PM (#34629670) Homepage

    Luckily everyone in the world is born with the physical and mental capacity to defend themselves...

    God may have created man, but Sam Colt made men equal.

Scientists will study your brain to learn more about your distant cousin, Man.

Working...