mckmas8808
Legend
Motorstorm screens
- Thread starter Angelcurio
- Start date
What is wrong with splitscreen? Even as poor man's multiplayer, not everyone has access to broadband. Like a good portion of PS owners.
Hmm, it would be nice if these games had LAN options. GT3 had Firewire LAN options back when the PS2 had Firewire, IIRC.
If PS3 supported ZeroConf (Apple calls it Bonjour I think), it might be easy networking.
PS3 does support UPnP. Can that be used for networking games?
But broadband availability is much higher than it was in 2000.
Everything is wrong with splitscreen.
Even with 4-player splitscreen you would still not get the same intensity because you won't have enough vehicles on the same track, that's why there are so many vehicles even in single player, it's not just about who's first, or who's got the best time, the game goes way beyond things like big air or an undulating track with multiple paths, it's a massive brawl, that's when it's the most fun, you have to have other vehicles there.
It's just not remotely the same even with 4 vehicles, a two-player option would be rather boring, unless you're playing with bots, but in that case, it's the AIs that makes the racing fun, not racing with your buddy(s). It's like starting a wave with four people, YES YOU CAN DO IT, but it's just kind of LAME.
Which is why you want multiplayer, to brawl with your friends. And brawling with friends is best when they're in the same room. Having to have 4 friends all with a PS3 to play multiplayer isn't particularly realistic. Having one PS3 and playing multiplayer on that is far more preferable.
For the record, it's multiplayer 'in the same room at the same time' games that'll sell me a console.
It's 'in the same room at the same time' that used to be the strict definition OF multiplayer, and there's no reason to lose that. Games should just be adding local LANning and playing over the internet, and--really--concentrating more on that aspect these days. But there's no reason to ignore either.
I agree having all the people in the same room is hard to beat, even with VOIP, even if they could do video.
However, as gamers get older, get married, have familial responsibilities, they can't go to some friend's home for hours of gaming. Maybe they do it once in awhile but it's hard to do once you get out of college, get a real job, etc.
Isn't the median age of gamers going up with each generation? Especially at the price these consoles are going for?
Especially for a launch window game on a platform still feeling out online. It shouldn't be an either / or. And from a history perspective, the 4 player angle on the N64 was a major selling point and way to get people hooked, ditto Halo LAN parties with 4 player split screen. Sure the graphics suffered, but the FUN sold tens of thousands of units. And I mentioned it was fun, right?
Likewise Crash Bandicoot racing on PS2, where four player even on low quality, quarter screens, was good fun. You know, some might say the graphics don't matter so much as long as the fun's there...
What does fun have to do with playing games? It's all about the graphics! And winning!
Well you can play Resistance co-op if playing in the same room is so important to you. This isn't four-player death-match we're talking about here, where naturally the four players would have to seek each other out because there's no other choice, frankly we can all pretend a racing game is "fun" with splitscreen four players on the same console, but it's actually not, I'm not sure it has ever been truly fun. Heck I don't even think four-player deathmatch is all that fun anymore, it's like a poor substitute for online play, quite frankly.
With Motorstorm, 4 friends playing splitscreen you would have the screen divided into 4, you would lose awareness of where the other vehicles are because the square you're playing in would be too damn small to show above/below/left/right, since you and your friends might be racing on different paths, also because the tracks are so huge, all four of you will end up brawling with nothing after the initial 5 seconds, you might have two guys brawling maybe once and the other two going past the finish line untouched and that sure as hell isn't a whole lot of fun. The CONCEPT of 4 players party-gaming might be appealling for a racing game, in practice it's crap, even the PSN demo track isn't suitable for four-player splitscreen, because 4 players would be too spread out over the track, maybe with minimum 8 players there would be much more interaction because there would always be a pack of vehicles fighting it out, whether it's for the lead or not. The tracks themselves would have to be completely overhauled and have all of the nuances and multiple paths taken out, just so 4 player splitscreen would even work.
I'm sure they can stick a four-player splitscreen mode in there as a bullet point, and Sony can make commercials with four people pretending they're having so much fun "party-gaming" but in reality four-player wouldn't be fun to play, you can't just stick four players on a Motorstorm track.
Last edited by a moderator:
Likewise Crash Bandicoot racing on PS2, where four player even on low quality, quarter screens, was good fun. You know, some might say the graphics don't matter so much as long as the fun's there...
You mean on the PS1? This might sound like complete heresy, but four player CTR would not be fun today (yes, getting together with your friends is fun, but that has nothing to do with 4 player CTR, you could have way more fun playing poker drunk or be involved in some other, more worthwhile endeavours, the actual racing with four people just isn't all that interesting an activity compared to having alot more people online battling it out on a huge track), it's like someone saying two player deathmatch in Medal of Honor 1 on the PS1 is fun, it WAS fun at the time but I don't know if anyone in their right mind would take that over a 16 player frontline match online, or 16 player Halo 2 online, or 40 player Resistance online. No disrespect intended, but I just don't see the 4 player party gaming thing being fun for more than maybe 5 minutes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah,right. Thanks for telling me what I find fun. Obviously I'm utterly confused about my own tastes! Obviously all the banter and joking and laughing I have, isn't fun at all! I'll have to start playing games where I don't do any of those things, in the sure fire knowledge that they're fun because you tell me they are...
While this is going off topic, seeing as you're so [strike]inciteful[/strike] insightful in my taste, can you also tell me what foods I like? I eat a lot of peanut butter, and tend to spit Marmite out. Is that right? Or do I actually like Marmite and hate peanut butter? I'm confused.
Who died and made you god?
I dont seem to recall that annoucement, so until you find me a link for that, you are in no position to tell other posters here (aspecially more respected posters) whats fun and whats not fun.
Further, there is no rule against adding CPU controlled vechicles to add intesity in split screen multiplayer, OR you could just be able to play online with guests. Like for example GR:AW does on the X360 (lets you bring up to four friends online, playing others).
You should try a Nintendo console sometime.
Who died and made you god?
I dont seem to recall that annoucement, so until you find me a link for that, you are in no position to tell other posters here (aspecially more respected posters) whats fun and whats not fun.
I checked the org chart and there have been no promotions within the pantheon of late. :smile: I'm sure we'd all appreciate if Kittonwy would be so kind as to express his own opinion of what constitutes "fun", to which he is entitled, as his opinion rather than natural law.
By the by, how cool would "God" be under your B3D handle? Senior Member? Pah. Mostly Harmless? Do me a favour.
Similar threads
- Locked
