Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×
Graphics Games

Ubisoft Talks Splitscreen and the Division 55

SlappingOysters writes: Ubisoft's next entry in the Tom Clancy series is pushing at the boundaries of three genres, mixing the RPG, the squad-based shooter and the MMO into The Division. The game features drop-in, drop-out co-op in a near-future, post-pandemic New York that seamlessly allows players to transition from PvE to PvP environments without any menus or lobbies. However, despite its co-op gameplay, The Division does not support splitscreen. Finder.com.au recently ran an extensive hands-on with the game, as well as an interview with Ubisoft Massive's creative director Magnus Jansén regarding the decision to forgo splitscreen co-op.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubisoft Talks Splitscreen and the Division

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    While I don't really buy the line:

    One of the biggest reasons why there is nothing like that in The Division is because of the progression nature of the game.

    The other comments seemed reasonable. Sounds like current generation consoles are simply not powerful enough to do it. Many development companies are struggling to hit the 60FPS/1080p target, let alone doing it split screen.

    • I had the same feeling to that line. What about Borderlands?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Power of the platform is largely irrelevant to split screen or not to split screen. Designers and artists will always find a way to consume more resources than are available. Supporting any target faithfully be it split screen, 1080p/60fps, VR, etc. requires a design, mindset and commitment from the beginning.

  • by TechnoCore ( 806385 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @08:54PM (#51498459)
    That's why split screen is hard to be found nowadays, it would drastically reduce the quality of the game.
    • by GuB-42 ( 2483988 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @10:26PM (#51498753)

      I don't think it will drastically reduce the graphics quality. Correct me if I am wrong but with all these new deferred rendering and complex shader stuff, more and more things are done per-pixel rather than on the geometry. It should make the penalty proportionally less. We are also to the point where graphical improvements are becoming subtle : enough for people to feel the difference but not enough for most of them to say exactly why.
      This should actually make split screen easier. Other parts of the game such as physics can be done once for all players.

      But as I've seen somewhere, split screen is not just a feature, it is a way of life. Split screen or single screen multiplayer in general is a totally different experience from network and solo play. Reducing a very different way of enjoying a game to a question of detail in a 3D renderer is rather silly IMHO.

      • You'd be wrong. The underlying rendering before effects are applied takes a big hit. Remember when split screening you don't just crop a section of the view, the view is zoomed out things are made smaller and far more geometry is put on the screen, and that's before effects are applied. There are many recent games that take a noticeable performance hit when doing split screen.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      That's why split screen is hard to be found nowadays, it would drastically reduce the quality of the game.

      Nope, splitscreen isn't found anymore because it bypasses the multiplayer "eco-system" of the publishers. You know the one where your multiplayer goes dark after 2 years because Ubishit or EA has decided you have to buy the new version ? Local lan disappeared for the same reason years ago from pc games and never came back. The same trend is happening/has happened on consoles.

      • To be fair, it's also a whole mode that you don't have to write if you don't use it. Consoles are cheap, most gamers have their own if they want them, most PC games don't even have a split screen mode, etc etc.

        • Consoles are cheap and, let's not forget that, very, very portable compared to PC rigs. What did you have to do to get your console over to a friend's house? Move the console and the controllers. He had a TV. And that's something you can put in a backpack.

          Consoles and playing console games with 4 or even more people were the staple of geek parties. Hell, Nintendo pretty much built the Wii around the idea of being a party gimmick when you look at it and its library of games. Every other game has some sort of

    • I don't miss it. 16:9 displays killed the split screen

      Now alternating frames with 3D glasses used to show 2 full screen games at once but a different frame to each player would be amazing!

      • by Zarhan ( 415465 )

        Just get two consoles and hook them up as separate input feeds. At least LG's TV's support this.

        • Yeah because the solution to something that would require a small amount of software and hardware 3D support is buying 2 consoles, 2 controllers, 2 copies of the game. It reminds me of that xbox360 racing game which allowed multi-monitor support, except that you needed an xbox360 per monitor, and a copy of the game per xbox to make it work.

          You can't be serious with your suggestion.

      • by GNious ( 953874 )

        Sony was talking about this - it went nowhere, fast.

        • Yep, they call it Simulview. People who had the necessary hardware (and the few games that support it) liked it.

          However 3D displays and glasses did not take off.

          • However 3D displays and glasses did not take off.

            Yes they did. The USE of 3D displays did not. I look around and I see most of my friends have a 3D TV and many a 3D bluray player too. Most of them (including myself) couldn't tell you where their 3D glasses are or if they work, but we all have the necessary hardware.

        • Sony was talking about this - it went nowhere, fast.

          Not surprised. Back when they were talking about it 3D TVs were a new thing. It would make sense to not put the effort into coding something that nearly all of the users can't use. But give it a few years. 3D TVs are becoming the norm, despite most people not using them. Maybe once something like this happens I'll have a reason to go look for my 3D glasses which probably have flat batteries right now.

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @09:05PM (#51498493)

    Always-on copy protection that keeps the honest player from playing for the first month or two while it doesn't bother those copying it illegally again? Or something sane for a change.

    Cut to the important parts that decide whether or not someone with half a brain even ponders looking at what the game is like before he dismisses it as "do not want".

  • by Lumpy ( 12016 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @09:17PM (#51498539) Homepage

    I played the betas, It's just Destiny in modern new york except the dark zone is the land of assholes that makes COD online feel civilized.

  • I like games like Hell diver and diablo 3 for couch-coop fun. Split screen is too distracting for me - never liked it.

  • by orlanz ( 882574 ) on Friday February 12, 2016 @11:37PM (#51498959)

    I really miss couch coop. I would give up a lot of today's graphic details to gain that back. That and good unique stories; rather than movie rehashes. Even if the story is a generic rehash. I am not really interested in creating clans, leader boards, who wasted a weekend doing what, etc. I just want a simple, fun game that when a friend comes over we can just start up and play. Having network capability and all is a plus, but can't be the core value.

    I think the whole "fun" aspect of gaming has long died and I miss it. The last POS I bought was Destiny. CoD, Resistance 3, Crisis, MoH, etc are ok games. But I just can't get the feeling out of my head that I had more fun 8 years ago. The last fun games I played were Lost Planet 2, Army of Two, and Gears of War.

    I guess I am an old fart and clearly not today's gaming demographic. It feels like today, all the game needs is a good marketing campaign. Maybe I will buy a PS4 this Christmas if this year's games live up to half their shiny.... but probably not. Certainly not falling for any pre-order bullshit.

    • Sounds like Gears of War 4 is keeping it - source [grabitmagazine.com]
    • The last POS I bought was Destiny. CoD, Resistance 3, Crisis, MoH, etc are ok games. But I just can't get the feeling out of my head that I had more fun 8 years ago. The last fun games I played were Lost Planet 2, Army of Two, and Gears of War.

      I just replayed LP2 on PC because it was recently on sale, holy crap it's so much nicer playing with a mouse and keyboard, shock amazement. As it turns out, LP3 is pretty good too. Not as good as you would have expected a sequel to LP2 to be, but the production value is very very high.

  • Three things (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    1. Split-screen really only works on consoles.
    2. No split-screen means every player needs to buy a copy.
    3. As a matter of general principle, fuck Ubisoft.

  • Split screen results in two people playing on one purchase. Get rid of it and now they have to buy it twice. What's hard to understand about that?

    • That no split screen means I have no reason to get it in the first place 'cause I can't play it at my parties, resulting in zero purchases.

  • fuck off Ubisoft.

All syllogisms have three parts, therefore this is not a syllogism.

Working...