Split-screen Poll | Forums

[Dez_troi_aR]

The lack of split screen is definitely a game changer for me. My girlfriend and I are constantly looking for new games we can play together, and since we live together it makes absolutely no sense to go spend $400 on a new console.

If you both love to play with each other and do that regularly that makes perfect sense to me. Its going to be more like 700$ because you need another TV. Thats a lot of money but if you both are gamers and its you hobbie i dont see why not to invest.

[Dez_troi_aR]

Anyway, sorry to hear that you are so disappointed.

[damon1085]

If you both love to play with each other and do that regularly that makes perfect sense to me. Its going to be more like 700$ because you need another TV. Thats a lot of money but if you both are gamers and its you hobbie i dont see why not to invest.

Exactly. Bare minimum, $400 for the console + $60 for the game + TV cost... so $700 is about right. Why not invest? Tons of reasons. Here's the short list...
1) We're casual gamers.
2) We have tons of other hobbies to turn to (table top games, books, real life sports, TV/movies, and so on).
3) Finances. Hell, I have to talk myself into spending $60 on any brand new game because there are so many old games out there that I haven't played yet which are 1/3 the cost. If $60 is borderline, 10x that is out of the question.

Also, I still haven't heard a single decent argument as to why split screen isn't doable. I'm all ears if anyone has any idea on that front, but until then I am just totally baffled by this decision from Ubi.

[Dez_troi_aR]

Exactly. Bare minimum, $400 for the console + $60 for the game + TV cost... so $700 is about right. Why not invest? Tons of reasons. Here's the short list...
1) We're casual gamers.
2) We have tons of other hobbies to turn to (table top games, books, real life sports, TV/movies, and so on).
3) Finances. Hell, I have to talk myself into spending $60 on any brand new game because there are so many old games out there that I haven't played yet which are 1/3 the cost. If $60 is borderline, 10x that is out of the question.

Also, I still haven't heard a single decent argument as to why split screen isn't doable. I'm all ears if anyone has any idea on that front, but until then I am just totally baffled by this decision from Ubi.

Well, of course you are right its a lot of money. I just thought that if one gamer affords a console then two players could buy two. But if its just occasional coop gaming then it wouldnt pay off, i guess.
Thing is, everyone who seems to be really angry about that tells in the next sentence that they have little time and just wanted to spend some of their rare free time on the coop every now and then. That makes me wonder why you even post on forums, join the hype etc, if you dont really care about the game that much anyway because you are too busy to play...
Dont get me wrong, its wonderful that you all are in the community but it makes me wonder if all the rage is not partly due to the fact that people just like to be offended..

[yodidlydo1862]

Also, I still haven't heard a single decent argument as to why split screen isn't doable. I'm all ears if anyone has any idea on that front, but until then I am just totally baffled by this decision from Ubi.[/QUOTE]


there's an interview with treyarch were they actually say that splitscreen is easier to do now than its every been

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthi.../#48c6ecaf1b20

I honestly don't understand why developers feel like they don't need to add splitscreen anymore. I feel like there logic is that since people use random online matchmaking everyday but don't use splitscreen every single day that its ok to take out. but they aren't taking into account the fact that splitscreen has always been a feature that people mainly use when friends and family come over. but when it does happen its more fun than any single player or online session could ever be due to the quality time your spending with people you care about. this is why Smash Bros and Mario Kart are legendary and sold an insane amount of copies on wii u despite there not being many people that have the console in the first place.

[damon1085]

Well, of course you are right its a lot of money. I just thought that if one gamer affords a console then two players could buy two. But if its just occasional coop gaming then it wouldnt pay off, i guess.
Thing is, everyone who seems to be really angry about that tells in the next sentence that they have little time and just wanted to spend some of their rare free time on the coop every now and then. That makes me wonder why you even post on forums, join the hype etc, if you dont really care about the game that much anyway because you are too busy to play...
Dont get me wrong, its wonderful that you all are in the community but it makes me wonder if all the rage is not partly due to the fact that people just like to be offended..

Regarding the money, what you say makes sense... if you assume that both people are working full time well paying jobs. That is not the case in my situation. Similar answer on the time comment. I want to spend time playing games. I grew up playing them and it's a great way for me to unwind after a bad day at work or whatever. However, because my time is limited I do NOT want to go online and play against all the college kids and Youtubers who do nothing but sit around and play games all the time. I'd get my butt kicked and that's no fun to me. Instead, I want to be able to play on the couch against my gf and/or friends who are more on my skill level. Or even just play co-op so the skill difference doesn't really matter. But I want to be able to do this without spending a ridiculous amount of money. I can go buy a table top game for ~$50 and I can share that with anybody who walks into my home. Why can't I do that with video games?

I'm still here posting on these forums because I do care about the game that much. It caught my eye and so far everything I've seen has been phenomenal, and I thought it would fill this massive void the gaming community has of having a quality couch co-op game. Now that they're taking that last part away, I'm really bummed. I'm sure the game will still be excellent and I'm still tempted to get it. But I care about the couch co-op too much to be able to justify spending that kind of money. If anyone can provide a reason why the couch co-op will hinder the rest of the game development I might change my mind. But so far I've heard no such explanation.

I've heard of other games, like Battlefront, say that they're going to remove a the single player campaign in favor of focusing on online multiplayer. That totally bums me out, but I can at least understand that reasoning. It takes a massive amount of time and effort to make a single player campaign, and I would argue it takes more time, money, effort, and people now to do it than it did 20 years ago (voice actors, real actors, motion capture, the list goes on). So while I still disagree with the decision, it makes sense that the devs might want to spend that time and effort on a different part of the game.

In complete contrast to that, yodidlydo1862 just posted a link saying how much easier it is to do split screen now (which I haven't read yet, but I plan to...). So if it's easy to do, it was already there in the Alpha build, and it doesn't take much time away from the rest of the game development, why the heck wouldn't you include it?


Aaaaand that got way more ranty than I intended. Sorry for that, I'll try and keep future replies shorter. But hopefully that helps show how much I do care about this game and how badly I want local split screen to come back. If it does, I'll buy this game in a heartbeat.

[Killerbrian26]

Jesus, this seems to be the new thing to wine about, now that everyone has flamed enough about deflect...
I understand everyone who is upsed because they were looking forward to have the occasional split screen party with a friend (and so was i), but the games focus was always on skill-based online multiplayer and now everone is suddenly behaving as if they were expecting to play a new Mario-Party...
I wonder if we were even talking about the same game if you are now suddenly stop following because of that.
If 'playing together with your best pal' is the greatest thing in the world for you, maybe you should just each buy a console which will enable you to play almost every game together, and in a much more enjoyable way.
And if you insist on it and playing on one console with multiple people is the coolest thing ever for you, why dont you follow all the cool games out there that enable you to do that and have a focus on that couch-coop aspect? Helldivers, just to name the first that comes to my mind. I like to play that with buddys a lot, but it is for the occasional short-term social gaming experience, not really a game that i personally would play heavily alone. For Honor on the other hand is a game that really could work as a long term game, were you develop your personal skill, rise up in ranks, even farm gear etc... But clearly not so much a game for a short couch-party with your pals who play the game every two months. Yet there you sit and whine....

I notice my posts get saltier by the day. I am a little sorry for that because i never saw myself as a person surfing the interwebs to spread bad vibes. But 80% of the things i see on the Forums is people complaining for questionable reasons. I was very happy seeing informative things like the class guides posted by the hall-of-heroes community. I enjoyed the Alpha footage Montages some players posted after the Alpha. I have fun reading about fan-theories like the Peacekeepers beeing viking descendants.
Could we please go back to the positive stuff ? I want to enjoy my hype, look forward to the game and discuss it in a optimistic way.
Not saying that well formulated critique is not alowed but this forum gets more negative by the day.

Greetings, have a nice day y all !

From my position, it wasn't necessarily that there wouldn't be splitscreen with the game that I was disappointed about. I was mainly disappointed that they have been constantly been advertising they will have splitscreen, and now it feels like they are pulling the rug from under us. While I hope this is only for online play, because they said they were removing it to help focus their resources towards that, I'm still disappointed at the lack of it, even if it is that way. I will still probably end up buying the game, but I think this is going to take away from a lot of the longevity this was going to have with me. I have several brothers and friends who were also very interested with the game that I was really looking forward to dueling with and playing the campaign with.

[Dez_troi_aR]

From my position, it wasn't necessarily that there wouldn't be splitscreen with the game that I was disappointed about. I was mainly disappointed that they have been constantly been advertising they will have splitscreen, and now it feels like they are pulling the rug from under us. While I hope this is only for online play, because they said they were removing it to help focus their resources towards that, I'm still disappointed at the lack of it, even if it is that way. I will still probably end up buying the game, but I think this is going to take away from a lot of the longevity this was going to have with me. I have several brothers and friends who were also very interested with the game that I was really looking forward to dueling with and playing the campaign with.

Sorry to tell you killerbrian: Splitscreen was 'removed from the game altogether'. That was stated by fredex somewhere. Campaign coop would have been nice, indeed.

[Dez_troi_aR]

Regarding the money, what you say makes sense... if you assume that both people are working full time well paying jobs. That is not the case in my situation. Similar answer on the time comment. I want to spend time playing games. I grew up playing them and it's a great way for me to unwind after a bad day at work or whatever. However, because my time is limited I do NOT want to go online and play against all the college kids and Youtubers who do nothing but sit around and play games all the time. I'd get my butt kicked and that's no fun to me. Instead, I want to be able to play on the couch against my gf and/or friends who are more on my skill level. Or even just play co-op so the skill difference doesn't really matter. But I want to be able to do this without spending a ridiculous amount of money. I can go buy a table top game for ~$50 and I can share that with anybody who walks into my home. Why can't I do that with video games?

I'm still here posting on these forums because I do care about the game that much. It caught my eye and so far everything I've seen has been phenomenal, and I thought it would fill this massive void the gaming community has of having a quality couch co-op game. Now that they're taking that last part away, I'm really bummed. I'm sure the game will still be excellent and I'm still tempted to get it. But I care about the couch co-op too much to be able to justify spending that kind of money. If anyone can provide a reason why the couch co-op will hinder the rest of the game development I might change my mind. But so far I've heard no such explanation.

I've heard of other games, like Battlefront, say that they're going to remove a the single player campaign in favor of focusing on online multiplayer. That totally bums me out, but I can at least understand that reasoning. It takes a massive amount of time and effort to make a single player campaign, and I would argue it takes more time, money, effort, and people now to do it than it did 20 years ago (voice actors, real actors, motion capture, the list goes on). So while I still disagree with the decision, it makes sense that the devs might want to spend that time and effort on a different part of the game.

In complete contrast to that, yodidlydo1862 just posted a link saying how much easier it is to do split screen now (which I haven't read yet, but I plan to...). So if it's easy to do, it was already there in the Alpha build, and it doesn't take much time away from the rest of the game development, why the heck wouldn't you include it?


Aaaaand that got way more ranty than I intended. Sorry for that, I'll try and keep future replies shorter. But hopefully that helps show how much I do care about this game and how badly I want local split screen to come back. If it does, I'll buy this game in a heartbeat.

To be fair, while i don't want to make a big deal of the cutting out of Splitscreen, i don't really get why they dont just do what every other gaming company does andy delay the release. Personally i am quite happy that i dont have to wait for them to include a feature that i dont care that much about but i can see why some would like it the other way around.

Ok, what i really wanted to say is just that you cant tell me that you have to sell your live to be decent in an online game. You won't be toptier, but by doing a little bit of training (not JUST playing around) one can easily get good by investing an hour a day or so. I don't play that much more myself, but i am quite "profit orientated"
That beeing said i think we wont be getting anywhere with our conversation because how much someone wants to play, what he/she wants to invest financially and what kind of gaming experience he seeks is purly a matter of priorities and personal taste. I dont think there are right or wrong tastes, but i think that there are games that fit some tastes better than others. And just maybe they decided to focus less on the casual gamer by making that desicion to cut couch coop.

[damon1085]

To be fair, while i don't want to make a big deal of the cutting out of Splitscreen, i don't really get why they dont just do what every other gaming company does andy delay the release. Personally i am quite happy that i dont have to wait for them to include a feature that i dont care that much about but i can see why some would like it the other way around.

Ok, what i really wanted to say is just that you cant tell me that you have to sell your live to be decent in an online game. You won't be toptier, but by doing a little bit of training (not JUST playing around) one can easily get good by investing an hour a day or so. I don't play that much more myself, but i am quite "profit orientated"
That beeing said i think we wont be getting anywhere with our conversation because how much someone wants to play, what he/she wants to invest financially and what kind of gaming experience he seeks is purly a matter of priorities and personal taste. I dont think there are right or wrong tastes, but i think that there are games that fit some tastes better than others. And just maybe they decided to focus less on the casual gamer by making that desicion to cut couch coop.

I agree for the most part with what you say here. If I invest 1 hour a day in training I probably could be competitive online. But that's exactly my point, I don't have 1 hour a day to dedicate to "training" rather than just playing around and enjoying the game. I'll skip the explanation, but the time just isn't there.

You say it is a matter of priorities and personal taste, and you're absolutely right. My main complaint here is that there are very few games - to the point of being almost non existent - that fit what I'm looking for. For Honor sold itself to me for over a year as being "my" perfect game. But as Killerbrian26 said, they're now pulling the rug out from under me/us.

It's just a shame to me that decent quality couch co-op games are a thing of the past. I realize that the fun loving, non competitive, casual couch players like myself are becoming fewer and fewer in number and that game developers don't want to make games for us because the ROI just isn't there. But with a games like For Honor or Battlefront where 99% of the framework is already there I really don't understand how they justify leaving it out. Especially here with For Honor since they've been saying it'll be there for well over a year.