split-screen gaming, seriously why is this dying?

[shootthebandit]

fortunately my company has paid for me and my colleauges to stay in student accomodation which means no rent for 8months. As a result i now live with 12 of my colleauges who are all really decent guys, i was one of the few who had a PS3 so i thought it would be cool if we had alittle gaming session but its unbelievable the amount of games that no longer support splitscreen and theres only so much black ops zombies that people can tolerate.

so i ask you 2 questions:
1) do you know of any good PS3 that support splitscreen

2) why do you think less and less games now support splitscreen? fortunatley i have a sister but i can imagine many households with more than one son would benefit and also people in my situation who are at college, university or flatshare with a colleauge

 

[Kpt._Rob]

It's hard to say exactly why, but I would guess there is some correlation to the rise of online multiplayer. For these companies, they know that they can make more money if you and your friend both have to own the game to play multiplayer, so if they leave out local (meaning that you and your friend both need a copy to play together) then they probably see some sort of rise in sales. That would be my guess anyways.

Yay capitalism -_-

 

[4RM3D]

Because every console now has multiplayer support across the internet. The previous generation consoles did not have a network card (in the beginning), so the only option was split screen.

Companies are trying to push the visuals of the game and split screen would be bad for the performance.

And personally I don't like split screen... too chaotic.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

money. you get one person to buy one game and everyone can play it? you only sold one game

only allow people to play it one person per console, though, and you sell more than one game.

math and capitalism.

it sucks...

Section 8 and its sequel should have had split screen, it would have become my game of the year if it just had that

 

[shadowslayer81]

Also it's kinda hard to graphics engines to run two players at once.

 

[Disaster Button]

Because of all the mouth breathers that screen watch.

 

[gigastar]

1) do you know of any good PS3 that support splitscreen

Resistance: Fall of Man, Resistance 2 and Killzone 3 all support splitscreen modes. Though Resistance 2 its reccomended you have an internet connection because that splitscreen can also be taken online co-op.

Also Resistance 3 (coming later this year/early next year) is supposed to have it too.

2) why do you think less and less games now support splitscreen? fortunatley i have a sister but i can imagine many households with more than one son would benefit and also people in my situation who are at college, university or flatshare with a colleauge

Its the whole money thing all over again. Publishers dont have to play the developers as much to put in a game feature thats not there, and maybe some other reasons that have cropped up on this thread.

 

[7777777777444]

2) why do you think less and less games now support splitscreen? fortunatley i have a sister but i can imagine many households with more than one son would benefit and also people in my situation who are at college, university or flatshare with a colleauge[/quote]

With the now basic need for online play, split screen is dying on consoles. While i, for one, love when a game has multiplayer, it does not suprise me that only online is supported.

While split screen should be supported, it is also a matter of money: If people pay to play online, in some cases, the developer may get some extra cash.

If im wrong on these, please, help me out.

 

[Ryengu]

My thought would be, because why would someone want HALF a screen to see what they're doing, when they can have a WHOLE one?

 

[That Mo Guy]

In most cases, I really don't think it's usually an issue of money, I think, as said above, it's more about the graphics engine having to handle two (or more) screens. Some games are pushing the console's capabilities with one screen, so having to handle more instances of the game is just out of the question.

What I don't get is when games allow you to splitscreen OR allow you to play online/lan, but not both. My friends and I had a bit of a Borderlands party last year that became a lot more expensive when we realized we couldn't play 4 players on 2 screens.


As for suggestions, I can't make any PS3 recommendations since I don't have one, but I would recommend checking out co-optimus if you haven't before. Really awesome resource for finding out what games have what co-op options.

 

[Jacob Haggarty]

I haven't got a clue, but damn do i wish it wasn't. Split screen will always trump online in my opinion, as even if you are in constant communication with your pal over online, you are still really and truly alone. You can have all the friends in the world online, and unless you have a mate with you, you are 100% on your larry.

At the very least i prefer system link. But alas alak, looks like i'll have to grin and bear the turbulent world of tossers and arse-holes that is random matchmaking.

In all honesty though, i dont really mind one way or the other. Split screen only wins marginally.

SPLITSCREEN>SYSTEMLINK>ONLINE.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

"Because they are trying to push the graphics" = totally bogus. They were trying to push the graphics on N64 and PS1, too, but those systems still had tons of split-screen. It's not that difficult to turn off or scale down a few graphics features to enable playable frame rates in a split-screen. PC games have offered much more comprehensive scaling for decades.

The correct answer is greed. They want everyone who plays the game to own the console, own the game, own the television, pay for the broadband connection, etc. It's the same reason they're pushing 3D television so hard right now; the necessity of glasses allows them to monetize every person who watches the television set rather than just the set itself.

I know some people dismiss these sorts of ideas as "conspiracy", but you'd have to be staggeringly naive not to see that this is how the world works now. In business, money is the only motivating factor.

 

[Nouw]

For those saying that money is why, do you realize that Microsoft's Halo games have had split-screen since CE? Just a little food for thought but then again they charge you for Multiplayer so it's understandable. Having said that, I'd rather have free Multiplayer than split-screen.

 

[Biodeamon]

the multiplayer has been taken over by the internet. also they don`t gain that much money with splitscreen

 

[Ranorak]

Because they want that buddy you play with to cough up the money for his own game.

 

[Bearjing]

My thought would be, because why would someone want HALF a screen to see what they're doing, when they can have a WHOLE one?

If your screen is big enough, half is plenty.

 

[Jfswift]

I wonder about that myself. It's still more fun to chill with friends and play on splitscreen than to have a game over the internet imho. That being said.. I think Resident Evil 5 offers it.

 

[Canadish]

My thought would be, because why would someone want HALF a screen to see what they're doing, when they can have a WHOLE one?

If your screen is big enough, half is plenty.

And lets not forget the whole issue of some people not owning a games console.
My friend used to always come over to mine and we'd splitscreen because he couldn't afford his own.
Now we have to take turns to play, and it sucks.
Hell, what if your friend owns a 360 while you own a PS3? Still can't play together.

It's an absolute crappy trend that destroyed one of the best aspects of console gaming.
Now we usually have to try get a PC game if we wanna play in the same damn room.