split screen play! WTF?!

Jul 1, 2008
372
0
0
#1
why are so many damn games lacking that?

Moron devs need to look at the top selling games and realize those are the ones with split screen.
Like God IS IT THAT HARD TO IMPLEMENT SPLIT SCREEN?

The latest game lacking slplit screen to piss me off...PURE WTF?!

Some of us still have gaming parties with our friends, which is more fun than online gaming

someone please explain to me why
 

-Deadpool-

Ultimate Veteran
Oct 7, 2007
20,338
0
0
37
#2
It probably is a big job. Games are engineered to use the system to its fullest extent. Cutting the screen in half doubles a lot of what's being processed, so it stands to reason that things like graphics, draw distance etc.. would have to be reduced to cope.

On the bright side, Motorstorm: Pacific Rift will have up to 4 player split-screen.

I'll never use it though I doubt. Only play online multi-player stuff these days. And the missus only really plays Buzz with me now - its all single-screen multi-player though.
 
Jul 1, 2008
372
0
0
#3
Laziness perhaps?

The devs of Cod4 and gt5p sure pulled it off, mind you those are argueably the most graphically amazing games this gen to-date

I've trade in alot of games due to the lack of split screen i.e. Motostorm, ut3, grid, Pure (soon)
 
A

AzureForge

Guest
#4
[QUOTE="HowlBridges, post: 0]Laziness perhaps?

The devs of Cod4 and gt5p sure pulled it off, mind you those are argueably the most graphically amazing games this gen to-date

I've trade in alot of games due to the lack of split screen i.e. Motostorm, ut3, grid, Pure (soon)[/quote]

CoD4 is not exactly G3 graphics.
GT5P is but only a demo, seeing as how they are taking so many years to make the full game, it is a very bad comparison.

It is definitely NOT laziness.

And yes, it is pretty hard to implement split screen
 
Mar 23, 2007
465
0
0
35
#5
i don't buy that its too hard for devs to make splitscreen. i mean their getting paid to make video games. come on now lets see more split screen and more bots for the split screen.
 
Jul 1, 2008
372
0
0
#6
^^dont get me started on the bots too! You're right


No matter how hard it is that should not be an excuse. Creating games for this Gen is not easy, thats a given. They shouldnt take on projects if they cant complete.

what is the point of buying extra controllers? I feel like I've wasted a ton of money
Pure really pushed me off the edge. I bought it not knowing (who woulda figured a game like that wouldnt have slpit screen?) Took it to my friends house and I was like WTF?! its a great game but no fun playing alone (online isnt that active) . I only play cod4 online
*my first disappointment was UT3, I almost cried lmao*

Is this Gen turning Gamers into lame loners/losers?
 
A

AzureForge

Guest
#8
[QUOTE="primalbreath, post: 0]i don't buy that its too hard for devs to make splitscreen. i mean their getting paid to make video games. come on now lets see more split screen and more bots for the split screen.[/quote]

Sure, they're getting paid to develop. But they are not getting paid to sell their lives. There are deadlines to keep to and these are NEVER set by the developers.

[QUOTE="HowlBridges, post: 0]^^dont get me started on the bots too! You're right


No matter how hard it is that should not be an excuse. Creating games for this Gen is not easy, thats a given. They shouldnt take on projects if they cant complete.

what is the point of buying extra controllers? I feel like I've wasted a ton of money
Pure really pushed me off the edge. I bought it not knowing (who woulda figured a game like that wouldnt have slpit screen?) Took it to my friends house and I was like WTF?! its a great game but no fun playing alone (online isnt that active) . I only play cod4 online
*my first disappointment was UT3, I almost cried lmao*

Is this Gen turning Gamers into lame loners/losers?[/quote]

Actually if you work in the application development line, you'll know there are many things that developers themselves don't control.

Executives/managers make changes and expect developers to conform all the time. And sometimes having additions means that you'll have to drop something.

This is the first generation where people are particular about the resolution and fps. Adding a split screen makes balancing this a hard job. Do you think the executives are really going to give another 6 months and risk losing a few million dollars?

It is definitely not right to blame it on the developers. Trust me, developers have their pride and want the best work possible. But life is not so kind.

No matter the reason, laziness does not play into it. It is always a question of whether they can add the function in without causing too much delays. And in some games, whether it can even be added in.
 

Shadowstar

Elite Member
Oct 12, 2006
1,680
0
0
40
#9
[QUOTE="primalbreath, post: 0]i don't buy that its too hard for devs to make splitscreen. i mean their getting paid to make video games. come on now lets see more split screen and more bots for the split screen.[/quote]
Do you want devs working on split screen or more awesome features?

Game development is a business, and if the business aspect of it says that many games don't need split screen to do well, they won't implement it.

It's hard. Not TOO hard, of course, but hard, and development resources go to where you get the most bang for your buck. In some games, that will mean split screen, and in others, it won't.

Additional data is needed if you want to render your split screen asynchronously. Are you willing to sacrifice breakable environments for split screen? Additional rendering time is needed on the GPU. Are you willing to sacrifice antialiasing? Additional rendering time is needed on the PPU and SPUs. Are you willing to sacrifice some physics for your split screen? (These are all made up, of course, but the point is that you don't get something for nothing, and most people would rather have these things than split screen-- there's usually something else that's a higher priority. You want split screen, voting with your money is probably the best you can do. And calling devs lazy? That's just ignorant... hahaha! Um, I mean... Go Larry Wall!)
 

mickice

Ultimate Veteran
Oct 8, 2006
22,327
112
0
33
Australia, In a Kangaroo's pouch.
#10
Resistance 1/2
WipEout HD
MotorStorm 2
GT5
LittleBigPlaet
Buzz!
SingStar
WarHawk.
Uh theres more

So clearly first party developers are still doing split screen. It's a real shame to see a game release like Pure and not have split screen.
 
Mar 8, 2007
367
0
0
boards.gamefaqs.com
#11
Doesn't the PS3 allow up to 7 controllers(4 for gaming?) to be connected at once? Yet they don't allow Split Screen... nor have offline bots? Too me that is pure laziness... they delay the game's soo much nowadays in which they could have "extra" time to implement the "extra" features... Even if it does drop the graphics a bit, IMO it would make the game that much more better because I could have a few friends/family play with me...
 
Sep 4, 2006
2,378
0
36
33
Pittsburgh PA
#12
[QUOTE="AzureForge, post: 0]CoD4 is not exactly G3 graphics.
GT5P is but only a demo, seeing as how they are taking so many years to make the full game, it is a very bad comparison.

It is definitely NOT laziness.

And yes, it is pretty hard to implement split screen[/quote]

so COD4 isnt a beast graphically??? wow thats a new 1 to me. and GT5P being a demo is even more reason for the game NOT to have split-screen yet we seen how that turned out.

i gonna go ahead and call laziness on this too. i see no REAL valid reason not to implement split-screen.
 

bayster

Master Poster
Dec 30, 2005
3,488
4
0
28
#13
I was going to write a rant like this awhile back, mainly coz i bought Ut3 which had ots and multiplayer, turned out it was online only, i mean there is so much wasted potential in that game. Also bots need to be put in splitscreen, as they've already done hard yards by including sp, why don't they go the extra step?

The lack of sp, is really annoying when mates come over and hardly any of he games have sp so we are forced into turns, however there are quite a few games which have ample offline mp. Such as sports games(virtua tennis ROCKS 4 player) also skate is a ame I've got with ofline mp but no one realy plays cod splitscreen coz it feels so empty, maybe not on shipment with 4 people but still bots should be required for sp shooters.

btw. sp means split screen

But i dont think this has urned gamers into losers, (for those who arent already ;)) but i think people are becoming to dependent on online mp with mates. However nothing and i mean nothing can beat sp mp with mates, you may be able to trash talk over mics but nothing funnier than someone pushing a random button on someones controller.

Anyway i think a few games see the light, Warhawk is perfect example as they blended sp mp ith online mp, how can you beat that?
 
A

AzureForge

Guest
#14
[QUOTE="TheMadTitan, post: 0]so COD4 isnt a beast graphically??? wow thats a new 1 to me. and GT5P being a demo is even more reason for the game NOT to have split-screen yet we seen how that turned out.

i gonna go ahead and call laziness on this too. i see no REAL valid reason not to implement split-screen.[/quote]

No I did not feel CoD4 was graphically amazing. That is not even new seeing as how most graphics comparison threads aren't even listing CoD4 as a choice.

The fact that it is a demo and has split screen makes me feel that they spent all that time making the demo work and then are needing an additional 2 years to make the game work. I am definitely not going to wait for 2 years just to have split screen along with the usual features.

If you were a software developer, you would know it is not laziness. But I guess its easy to blame others because you don't feel good about it.

[QUOTE="bayster, post: 0]I was going to write a rant like this awhile back, mainly coz i bought Ut3 which had ots and multiplayer, turned out it was online only, i mean there is so much wasted potential in that game. Also bots need to be put in splitscreen, as they've already done hard yards by including sp, why don't they go the extra step?

The lack of sp, is really annoying when mates come over and hardly any of he games have sp so we are forced into turns, however there are quite a few games which have ample offline mp. Such as sports games(virtua tennis ROCKS 4 player) also skate is a ame I've got with ofline mp but no one realy plays cod splitscreen coz it feels so empty, maybe not on shipment with 4 people but still bots should be required for sp shooters.[/quote]

Definitely it is annoying. I had to buy some games that offer split screen in genres that I didn't like so that my friends would have something to play when they come over.

But splitscreen implementation is not just ONE step in a hundred yard walk. Trust me it isn't.

I am not saying it is not annoying not having splitscreen. It annoys me too. But it is definitely not because developers are lazy. It is not fair that you guys just decide to slam the same developers who've worked day and night to make those awesome games work for something that is not true.
 

bayster

Master Poster
Dec 30, 2005
3,488
4
0
28
#15
Yeah to the devs defence, I don't think that putting in sp is a small feat and with development costing more and more the devs do have an excuse, in that sense. I think the main problem is us as we have just taken it for granted and most people have moved to online mp, meaning devs have to spread their resources more then ever as online mp becomes necessary yet sp is not to many people.
 
Nov 19, 2007
3,761
0
36
#17
Haze had split screen with bots (2 player only) but it was complete rubbish. COD4 is a great 4 player split screen but would have been better with bots. Wipeout HD runs silky smooth in split screen and has bots (2-player only). Killzone 2 and Motorstorm 2 should show us how full 4 player split screen with bots is done properly.
 

Enthroll

Apprentice
Mar 27, 2008
496
4
0
35
Tuscany
#18
imagine burnout paradise with split screen...
i'll buy motorstorm 2 mainly for the sp. come on.. nothing compares to have a party at home while enjoying a nice split screen, eh?
 
Feb 27, 2007
490
0
0
33
#19
I have to agree even though I mainly play online, split screen should be in all racing games, and fps games. Suprisingly my Wife likes WipEout HD and so splitscreen has been great apart from her getting first and me getting last in many races :oops::sad:
 
A

andyst32

Guest
#20
COD4 isn't split screen is it?

I couldn't find that option and maybe am being dumb but I really don't think it is.

Totally agree about sp though as nothing beats the 1 on 1 competitiveness of split screen racing.

Resistance for me was one of the best games ever due to 2 player co-op.
 
Nov 19, 2007
3,761
0
36
#21
[QUOTE="andyst32, post: 0]COD4 isn't split screen is it?

I couldn't find that option and maybe am being dumb but I really don't think it is.

Totally agree about sp though as nothing beats the 1 on 1 competitiveness of split screen racing.

Resistance for me was one of the best games ever due to 2 player co-op.[/quote]

Yeah COD4 is 4 player split screen. It's not split screen co-op though, you can't do the campaign. You can do all the multi-player maps 4 player split screen offline. Me and my mates do it all the time.
 

nate0409

Apprentice
Nov 21, 2006
335
0
0
39
#22
knives only split screen on cod4 is pretty damn fun.. i think cod5 will be having splitscreen campaign mode cant wait for that
 
Aug 26, 2008
465
0
0
31
#23
Developers don't want you to get out of the experience while split-screen is fun I would prefer online co-op so I can have the screen all to myself.
 
Nov 19, 2007
3,761
0
36
#25
[QUOTE="CanisDiris, post: 0]Developers don't want you to get out of the experience while split-screen is fun I would prefer online co-op so I can have the screen all to myself.[/quote]

I don't really think that's too much of a problem with the size TV's people have these days. I remember playing 4 player split screen Goldeneye & Mariokart back in the day on a 20" CRT. You can have 20" to yourself now on 4-player split screen on a 40" like I've got, works fine.
 

theJZA

Superior Member
Nov 29, 2007
641
0
0
32
Orlando, FL
#26
If you notice, more games that are currently set for release, feature split screen. Yes, it could be that developers are lazy, but then again they do what their told. It's like a soldier in the army, don't things other than what he was ordered. Anyway, the reason for why there was barely any split screen , was because of an advertisement procedure. Motorstorm, for example, came out with the Playstation 3. Sony wanted to "force" us to play online, to show that it was just as functional as the other two consoles, but even better because of the price (free). Just like we're forced to use the sixaxis. Do we really need the feature put in the controller? No, but it makes a nice addition. Now BOTS are a different story, and I don't know the reason for it. We really need bots in MP, seriously. Red Faction 2 has to be the best offline MP, just because of the Bots
 

DarkVincent07

Trying not to break stuff...
Mar 4, 2008
17,313
89
0
28
Sydney
#27
[QUOTE="ParmSingh, post: 0]I was amazed that motorstorm wasn't split screen to begin with.[/quote]

Oh god, so was i!!
My friend and i both got our ps3s with Motorstorm and he got 2 controllers, then got home and realised it wasnt split screen...
 
Sep 4, 2006
2,378
0
36
33
Pittsburgh PA
#28
[QUOTE="AzureForge, post: 0]No I did not feel CoD4 was graphically amazing. That is not even new seeing as how most graphics comparison threads aren't even listing CoD4 as a choice.

The fact that it is a demo and has split screen makes me feel that they spent all that time making the demo work and then are needing an additional 2 years to make the game work. I am definitely not going to wait for 2 years just to have split screen along with the usual features.

If you were a software developer, you would know it is not laziness. But I guess its easy to blame others because you don't feel good about it.[/quote]

wtf are you even talking about??? dont feel good about what???

and lots of ppl believe COD4 looks good. as for GT5P again its a demo and it has split-screen. you can act like they wasted time putting it in all you want but i highly doubt adding split-screen was a big deal when creating that DEMO.

but whatever. im glad we have you here to assure us that its not laziness coming from you guys. you are a developer righ?
 

shinoff2183

Dedicated Member
Jan 26, 2007
1,176
0
36
37
#29
[QUOTE="AzureForge, post: 0]Sure, they're getting paid to develop. But they are not getting paid to sell their lives. There are deadlines to keep to and these are NEVER set by the developers.



Actually if you work in the application development line, you'll know there are many things that developers themselves don't control.

Executives/managers make changes and expect developers to conform all the time. And sometimes having additions means that you'll have to drop something.

This is the first generation where people are particular about the resolution and fps. Adding a split screen makes balancing this a hard job. Do you think the executives are really going to give another 6 months and risk losing a few million dollars?

It is definitely not right to blame it on the developers. Trust me, developers have their pride and want the best work possible. But life is not so kind.

No matter the reason, laziness does not play into it. It is always a question of whether they can add the function in without causing too much delays. And in some games, whether it can even be added in.[/quote]

6 months seems like a little overstretching it.
 
A

AzureForge

Guest
#30
[QUOTE="shinoff2183, post: 0]6 months seems like a little overstretching it.[/quote]

Yes it is. I exaggerated the time frame to match the "few million dollars" phrase I was going to use.

But you get my point