Support NeoGAF

[SoldierOfLight]

Although the I don't have 8 people to local play, I feel they need to make more 8 player local player games. So simple yet so much fun with a part of people.

Knight squad in Xbox one is one of them.

Don't know of any others

 

[ronaldthump]

Not at all.

 

[The Stranger]

Local co-op is my primary concern when looking for multiplayer games. If it doesn't have local then I skip it.

 

[bman94]

Depends on game and genre.

4 player split screen on Halo and Mario Kart is essential.

It's a tradition to play through the newest Gears of War game on split-screen co-op with my best friend.

 

[LinkSlayer64]

Very. I run events where we get lots of people in the same place to play games, and I play with my mother.

 

[jesu]

Not at all really.
I barely play them these days.

 

[Hippopuncher12]

Probably the least important thing in a game to me at this point. It's been years since I have played local multi, my friends and I do other things at this point.

 

[PrimeBeef]

It depends on the game. Fighting, party, and racing I would prefer local. Other tha that it is not that important.

 

[Mareg]

Depends on the game.
But wherever there is a multiplayer options, I always prefer local.
In fact, local multi is the only option where I'm concerned. Preferably 4player local. And no split screen obviously.

 

[Kyzon]

I like having the option honestly. It's also a must on fighting games.

 

[quackamole]

Local multiplayer to me right now is absolutely worthless. Maybe I will change my mind when I have children old enough to play games, but that's at least a few years away.

 

[KillLaCam]

Generally unimportant. But in something like Halo id say its the most important thing for me. Halo's usually the one game that I play with all of my family and friends. Id actually buy an X1 if 5 had splitscreen.

Sure I could play fighting games or something with my family but I usually have to go super easy on them for everyone to enjoy it. With Halo we could do co-op or endless fun mini-games made on forge. Halo taking away splitscreen pretty much killed off the X1 for me

 

[Shaanyboi]

Depends entirely on whether or not it's the kind of game my gf would want to play with/against me, or if it's the kind of game that would be fun at a party.

 

[OzzieTF]

Used to be huge, but my friends don't play video games, so aside of 1 football match per... Year?! Not really important anymore.

 

[InterMusketeer]

I live on my own and my friends all live in different cities. The few times a year we meet up, we don't really play many games. Local multiplayer is cool, but I rarely make use of it. Online is much more important to me.

 

[SapientWolf]

Very. I love playing co-op games with my boyfriend, but the amount of meaty local co-op experiences on PC today is just depressing. Everything is either some sort of goofy party game or towerfall clone. Not that those are bad on their own, but playing Halo and Gears of War with my brothers when I was younger are some of my favorite gaming memories. I just can't find anything that really replicates that, especially since I don't own any current gen consoles aside from the Wii U.

We've tried a few different games, the only ones that really stuck are Overcooked, Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime, and Nidhogg. I think Overcooked is a little tough for him to wrap his brain around (he's not typically a gamer) and LiaDS is really, really repetitive. Nidhogg is simplistic, but kinetic and weird enough that it's really fun, but only for a couple rounds at a time before we get bored.

You should get up on those isometric Lara Croft games. They're all kinds meaty. Rocket League is also awesome in co-op. Many high fives were had at my household.

 

[Adam Tyner]

Massively unimportant. Are people over 20 really getting all their friends round to play smash bros or Mario kart locally?

This was a couple gens back, I know, but my friends and I absolutely got together when we were all in our very early twenties to play Halo and Mario Kart: Double Dash locally.

 

[DaleDestruction]

It depends on the type of game. I think halo cutting local split screen was a bit of a harsh move but I don't own an xbone and haven't played it so can't really comment, but I used it all the time in the older games with friends and like your example in the OP I played loads of diablo 3 on console with those same friends on local multiplayer. Borderlands is another game I usually play with someone else on local multiplayer. If your RPG is a loot centric game then local multiplayer is definitely worth it.

 

[Ashtar]

I love games with local coop even if I don't actually play them.
I buy a ton of games based off coop and the hope that my wife will be willing to play with me (sometimes she actually does)
I was playing divinity local coop and it was a ton of fun to play, made me think why don't more rpgs do this, if the game we're tough as nails I would have played it with my wife.

 

[Pharaun]

It's incredibly important to me. Most of my gaming is done with my wife and kids so anything that we can play together is huge.

 

[One Eyed Willy]

Never used to matter, but now a family man with a wife who likes to game on occasion and a 7 year old son and 4 year old daughter.. its more important than ever.

I've had more fun with Mario 3D world, Rocket League, Overcooked than just about the last 20 years of gaming online multiplayer. It's that good.

 

[wildfire]

My god, all these "cut it" posts. I don't know who you people are but playing with friends in real life in the same room will never be usurped by online multiplayer.

That's why lan parties got so big we got Dreamhack.

 

[ProgenitorCastle]

Very important to me. A game like Nintendoland for example gets its main share of play from me and my friends from the local co op games included in it

 

[whitemex88]

I have no friends. So not at all.

 

[IDontBeatGames]

I would say not important at all. I barely have people over and even when I am with friends, we'd rather all go play old consoles for nostalgia sake such as Mario Party, Mario Kart etc. I'd rather see a big dlc being added than local multiplayer. Plus, I'm pretty positive more people play online multiplayer than local multiplayer.

 

[Wiped89]

Very, very important. It's why I buy Nintendo consoles. Some of the best fun I've ever had gaming has been playing Mario Kart or Wii Sports or Smash Bros, or whatever else.

My girlfriend always asks me when I'm playing Forza Horizon 3 or Tomb Raider or Uncharted 4 'ooh can I play too?' And it kinda breaks my heart to tell her it's a one player game and she has to just watch.

 

[RockmanBN]

Very much so. My best multiplayer memories are all from local multiplayer experiences. More fun with a friend side by side. Though it's understandable as people grow older, people drift away. Keeping obline multiplayer is the only way do that again which is necessary for some people.

 

[Jolkien]

Not important at all. Always hated splitscreen. Same screen local coop is nice but I play online with friends way more often.

 

[ieptbarakat]

I live in a rural area and my friends live far enough away that getting together to play a game isn't viable, so I can understand it's appeal but I wish more games supported online multiplayer/coop as well.

 

[Smasher89]

Depends on the game, if its a fighting game(with reaction based stuff, which is getting rarer and rarer now) that requires precise inputs, local is the only way to go, if its something slightly more casual it depends on a case for case basis.

Something I really liked with the DS (3ds also had this feature, but much less utilized) was download play, that way you can get the benefits you are mentioning about screen rendering and stuff like that, and the players can still play it locally for the same cost as 1 game.

I like teambased onlinegames in theory, but in practice it's just hard to set up a team with a similar goal when playing so mostly end up soloing which could be switched for a better experience elsewere.

I do absolutely not like the splatoon approach, where they sell a full priced game, that is basicly only online, and teambased, but it marketed as "competive team game" and still dont have a competent local multiplayer (no, 8 wii u's should not be required for a local multiplayermatch).

 

[GreenMonkey]

Split screen is meh.

Local multiplayer is great though. A game like Secret of Mana is meh for me, but playing multiplayer SoM is awesome.

 

[Nerix]

It's very important, as I really like to play games with my wife and a few friends of mine. But obviously it depends on the genre.

Splitscreen is something I don't like that much anymore, as the graphics get worse and the screen smaller. Ideas like SimulView for 3D TVs (getting a full screen for each player without a stretched image) were awesome, but unfortunately not supported well. But I still play splitscreen games, though I prefer same screen local coop if the game design allows that.

Local coop games I played and am playing (PS4):
Rocket League
Diablo 3 (a lot, great local coop game)
Alienation (without the patch that introduced local coop I wouldn't have bought it)
Don't Starve Together
Tetris Ultimate
Dead Nation
Divinity Original Sin (though it's very text centric, which makes it a difficult game to play in coop)
Helldivers
LBP3
Rayman Legends

and probably quite a few others.

 

[BrunOz]

Extremely important.

 

[The Horror the horror]

Important

My wife loves to play video games and some of our best memories include beating games together.

 

[Speely]

The streaming local mp the Switch will offer is a big deal for me. Split screen is... well, split screen. It's not optimal. Local streaming between devices and full-screen, however... GLORY. I really hope a lot of games take advantage of this.

 

[BakedTanooki]

Very important, if the game has multiplayer or especially co op.
For example: I play and finish every Musou game in splitscreen coop with my girlfriend.
We are also hyped for every new Tales Of... Game, because you can play them local co op.
We were also very disappointed when we heard that Ubi Soft canceled the split screen modes of For Honor.

And every (arcade) racing game needs Splitscreen Multiplayer!

 

[Ivory Samoan]

Not too important, haven't played local multi properly since the 90s.

Having said that, the odd game of NBA or Streetfighter locally is pretty fun on occasion with the lads, but it's not a deal breaker for me.

 

[Goldboy]

I still play a lot of local multiplayer with my friends, so while it's not essential I do appreciate games with local multiplayer.

 

[jax]

Incredibly important. Sony and Microsoft handed this incredibly important feature to Nintendo on a silver platter, and I think that will hurt them in the long run. Nothing is more fun than playing a game together, and many people do not wish to portray the "gamer shut in" stereotypes.

Hopefully they realize that VR can have great local multiplayer opportunities as well.

 

[meerak]

It's very important to me, shame it's getting rarer.

 

[Octavia]

Absolutely 0 interest.

 

[ZelbZelb]

If the gameplay involves any type of cooperation or teamwork, local multiplayer is sorely missed.

JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Eyes of Heaven was a 2v2 team based arena fighter with no co-op for story mode. No local versus. Online was completely unplayable, too. So all you could do is play with the dumb CPU. It was a pretty big failure without it.

So some games just don't work without it.

 

[RedSwirl]

I don't get many opportunities for it, but as far as consoles are concerned I prefer it.

Actually, I just don't like matchmaking. Either get me local multiplayer or a server browser.

 

[i-Jest]

Depends on the game and genre, but I generally see it as important.

 

[linkboy]

I prefer local, especially for the interaction between people.

Plus, it's fun to play games together with my son.

 

[ExitPlanetDust]

I find myself looking for it as a selling point when I shop for certain genres.

...but in practice I rarely do anything with local multiplayer. I can't remember the last time I had someone over for split screen Borderlands or even old skoool themed Assault Android Cactus.

I guess it's a security blanket thing.

 

[MrGerbils]

Local multiplayer games are absolutely my favorite type of games but I'm in my 30s, a father (of a toddler too young for games), work full time, and don't have any friends nearby who game, so despite being my favorite I only ever get to play local multiplayer games once or twice a year.

That said, I always buy near every great local multiplayer game if it's the right price because it pays off for those rare occasions. Gang Beasts and Nidhogg are some of my fav gaming memories of last year even if I only played them each twice.

 

[inpHilltr8r]

When I was living at home, or later in shared houses, essential. Now, not so much. When friends bring their kids over.

 

[poodaddy]

It's the difference between me purchasing it near launch or waiting for a humble bundle or perhaps crossing it off the list altogether. I've got a wife and daughter who always wanna play everything I touch, so if local multi-player isn't supported it would have to be one hell of a game to even stay on my radar.

 

[FarFromAnyGame]

Zero interest in local multiplayer(or in multiplayer in general) unless it's a local multiplayer game in the first place like overcooked, worms, gang beasts, etc.

I don't want local multiplayer in my AAA games.