Lack of split-screen in recent FPSes

[The Executive]

I can't speak for the 360, but the PS3 is getting more and more shooters with excellent online multiplayer that for whatever reason lack splitscreen (UT3 is a prime example). Other games like GTAIV also lack splitscreen (which is weird because San Andreas had splitscreen albeit limited).

I'm all for online gaming but I like being able to play against people without needing multiple copies/consoles. Is there some reason for this trend?

 

[Crimson King]

Hopefully so. Split screen is TERRIBLE. Seriously, learn to play Warhawk in one screen, then get a friend to play with you. The reduced screen changes the game so much.

Thankfully, there aren't as many gamers who'd want to play, but still. If my girlfriend does, we just alternate.

 

[The Executive]

I'm not saying split-screen is the pinnacle of multiplayer gaming, but it'd be nice to at least have it as an option.

 

[Black Waltz]

Halo 3 + splitscreen is probably the funnest/funniest thing to ever happen. so much random **** goes on that i cant stop laughing when im playing with friends.

 

[Red Exodus]

The leading ISP here sucks so the only I can play games multiplayer effectively is through spilt screen, but normally that sacrifices skill [screen watchers], frame rate, graphics and screen size so it's not always enjoyable.

 

[Doggalina]

The thing is, there's no reason NOT to have splitscreen. I doubt it's hard to implement. More features, especially ones like splitscreen, never hurt.

Take Medal of Honor Heroes 2 for Wii. I would've bought it, but the only multiplayer is online. What happens when I have friends over and we want to play multiplayer? Our only option would be to hook up multiple Wiis (with multiple copies of the game) to the Internet and get on the same server.

Oh, and a possible reason for the trend: No splitscreen means you need to BUY more copies of a game ($$$) to play with your friends.

 

[Games'n'Music]

I agree. I've been noticing this as well, and I miss my splitscreen. It's gets so boring when you have to play online to play with your friends. Also, it's much better in my opinion to chill, eat, drink and all that good stuff with friends than alone.

 

[Cashed]

The reason so few console games are having splitscreen is the developers try to push their games as hard as they can on the system. If they try to split the screen in two after doing that, they're left with an unstable mess, it's easier for them to just get it running well for a single screen than have to worry about cutting the screen in half.

The lack of splitscreen will prevent me from purchasing games. I don't know if I'll ever purchase Call of Duty 4 due to its lack of online splitscreen. Sure, there's offline splitscreen, but I don't want to play 1 on 1 with a friend, I want me and my friend to hop into a game with a bunch of other people so we're actually having fun, not just wandering around trying to find each other.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Call of Duty 5 is going to be split screen.

 

[Cashed]

Yeah, don't want another World War 2 shooter, especially one made by Treyarch.

 

[Darkslash]

Yeah, don't want another World War 2 shooter, especially one made by Treyarch.

They did a fine job with Call of Duty 3. The only problem was they had 11 months to do it. And i loved the vehicles. Treyarch added something to CoD and not reused the same formula again. Besides for this game they are having the roughly the same amount of time Infinity Ward had for CoD4. Besides i want to Flamethrower some machine Gun Nests.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Yeah, check out the trailer on Saturday, and see what you really think, enter with an open mind, and decide, is this going to be just another World War Two piece of junk, or something that captures WWII in a fresh, new light.

 

[Cashed]

I've got enough shooters to choose from to be able to disqualify ones from being even potential purchases just because of their setting, developer, lack of co-op, lack of splitscreen, lack of future support, what have you. It just so happens that World at War has at least two of those things, so I'm going to stay far away from it. Feel free to preach World at War in the World at War topic, but not here.

 

[The Executive]

The thing is, there's no reason NOT to have splitscreen. I doubt

...

No splitscreen means you need to BUY more copies of a game ($$$) to play with your friends.

It's gets so boring when you have to play online to play with your friends. Also, it's much better in my opinion to chill, eat, drink and all that good stuff with friends than alone.

Agreed.

Also, I'm sick of WWII shooters. Despite the handful of really, really good ones there are so many more flooding the market that are subpar products. Ever since Medal of Honor's 27th consecutive WWII game I've been turned off to WWII shooters.

I would love a good Civil War shooter, but the only people who took up the challenge were the History Channel and their game was very poor.