• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

No Split Screen in Titanfall

Theecliff said:
But there are still plenty of people who play split-screen in online games, so why should we want to ruin their fun? And Senjitsu's comment made it sound like he was saying it would be a good thing to get rid of split-screen multiplayer in all games, which is ridiculous - why would it matter to him if a game had that function?
Click to expand...

Well I was responding to your question of why someone who didn't want to play split screen would care if the game had it or not. I know plenty of people enjoy split-screen, that's why I agree that it would have been nice if the game had it.
 
I can tell a lot of people in here don't have friends who play games. Split screen is a must for people who actually do enjoy socializing in person, shame.
 
did killzone shadow fall or battlefield 4 have split screen?

The only ps4/xbox one shooter I know with split screen is ghosts at the moment.

its a bummer that split screen is dying/dead but what can you do

when I used to go over friends/dorms split screens where the best


:'(
 
I'm getting it for PC so its not a big deal breaker for me but it sucks when most console shooters don't support split-screen in any mode. Killzone: Shadow Fall would have been more tolerable with a friend.
 
63d2a91a89c4090bd3e1ba364c38e2825686af20.gif


This is outrageous!
Not really, but it gives me 1 less reason to care about it not releasing on ps4.
 
Im sorry, but im not understanding the outrage. Why would be a multiplayer only game support spilt screen? Isnt the whole point about playing people online? You would really be willing to give up that much screen estate in a online match?

If it had offline modes, then fair game, but it seems to me people are confusing Always online and multiplayer only in this thread. One is not the same as the other.
 
ThoughtsOfSpeaking said:
Im sorry, but im not understanding the outrage. Why would be a multiplayer only game support spilt screen? Isnt the whole point about playing people online? You would really be willing to give up that much screen estate in a online match?

If it had offline modes, then fair game, but it seems to me people are confusing Always online and multiplayer only in this thread. One is not the same as the other.
Click to expand...
Nah man, plenty of people want split screen online. In Halo, there are always people playing split screen on guest accounts.
 
Lack of split screen is certainly a problem (in general), when my friend comes over and we realize that we can't even play the brand new next gen console together. It's absolutely bogus.
 
Not surprising. It's likely a somewhat significant technical effort, and Respawn seems to be trying to focus their efforts as much as possible.

MormaPope said:
People that have friends locally and don't want to take turns playing alone.
Click to expand...

I love co-op games, so I get the desire, but splitscreen is such a compromised experience, I'll avoid it if at all possible. I have a particular friend that I play lots of co-op with, and we each have a big TV and at least one 1080p monitor, so one just brings his system to the other's house. One couch, two screens (monitor on coffee table), much nicer.

I realize that's a more expensive, complicated setup, but its well worth it for us.
 
Titanfall is looking more and more like half a game. How many maps will it have? Of course they won't say.

I bet Destiny won't have splitscreen either.

Last gen was awesome for local co-op. It was a renaissance for the feature compared to the PS2 gen. Hell, there was far more local splitscreen games released last gen than there was for the N64 gen too. I will dual anybody to the death who disagrees.
 
Splitscreen gameplay is a good thing. What about the people who have friends that come over and play?? People still do that ya know...

Its gonna be weird telling my friends the big new mutliplayer shooter is only one player at a time since other games like COD anfd Halo still have it. Definitely needs to be rectified by Titanfall 2.

Idk...starting to feel like I shouldnt pick this up for that $60 price tag :/
 
Dark_AnNiaLatOr said:
Lack of split screen is certainly a problem (in general), when my friend comes over and we realize that we can't even play the brand new next gen console together. It's absolutely bogus.
Click to expand...

"Hey man, wanna come over and pass the controller around like it's the fucking caveman era?"

"Cool dude lemme get my coat I mean sabertooth pelt."
 
Damn, I thought for sure Respawn would "get" why split screen is still vitally important. I'm still gutted that COD:G doesn't have four player mode.

Phooey.

SenjutsuSage said:
What the hell? Who cares, the more games do away with that crap, the better.
Click to expand...

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read.
 
wotta said:
What my advise would be is to wait and see, rather than building this up as the next big thing (which all sounds like desperation that it is, rather than being sure about the fact).
Click to expand...

There seems to be a lot of desperation for it not to be, actually... For whatever reason. Impressions from people who've played it are through the roof, so we'll see.
 
Why is this game launching at 60 again?
I know i'm bias since i'm not much of a MP gamer, but even I was hyped at first. Everything I have read and seen makes it seem the only way you're getting your money worth is if this is all you'll play for awhile. I think i'll just wait for it to go on sale. Which it'll do sooner or later since it's EA. They don't hold game prices up like activision seems to.
 
I guess this was expected from some of the COD fans? I dont blame them I guess?

But lets be realistic here. Moving forward these games are gonna either be trying to be online only (1 player only) or rely heavily on SP campaigns with MP modes. The couch co-op is dead on consoles. These devs with limited budgets (or maybe they just dont want to put extra effort) are not gonna optimize the game to run 2+ screens on their engines if they want to run the game at 60FPS@720P or 1080P@30FPS. It just wont happen with these "ceilings"/goals that they are working with or trying to achieve.

More so with Xbone, these things are just not gonna happen as they cant reach what it was expected for this gen. (1080P@60FPS**) So all I would say to all Gaffers is forget about split screen. This will only happen with games that arent taxing or small indie games/digital titles. (If co-op is supported in 'big' titles, only 2 like in COD GHOST)

**Edit: Just before I get crucified, those were expectations that both consoles are having difficulty reaching but PS4 has an easier time or atleast in my mind more likely to be able to pull off 1080P@60FPS just like Tomb Raider did. It runs variable 60FPS@1080P.
 
Some of these responses are disturbing. People saying "who cares" and "it's better that way" is really annoying. People do care and it's not better without more options, options are good for everyone.

People are so quick to defend there games/consoles of choice even if it means acting like a complete moron.

If it was found out tomorrow the the Xbox One or PS4 only lasted 2 years before intentionally failing I bet the thread on here would be filled with a bunch of morons saying crap like " oh well I always replace mine then anyway", "who cares" or " it's like that for a reason".
 
Militant17 said:
Some of these responses are disturbing. People saying "who cares" and "it's better that way" is really annoying. People do care and it's not better without more options, options are good for everyone.

People are so quick to defend there games/consoles of choice even if it means acting like a complete moron.

If it was found out tomorrow the the Xbox One or PS4 only lasted 2 years before intentionally failing I bet the thread on here would be filled with a bunch of morons saying crap like " oh well I always replace mine then anyway", "who cares" or " it's like that for a reason".
Click to expand...
Exactly even if I didnt have people to play locally with, why would I oppose the option. The world doesn't revolve around me lmao.

To be fair I never expected titanfall to have local multiplayer. I'm just responding to the people who are opposed to local multiplayer. "So 1990s" nah your just old and dont hang out as much anymore

What would be the point in supporting more than one controller on the console with local multiplayer, might as well buy all my games on PC then.
 
It's disappointing, since the game seems like it wants to bring some new flavor into multiplayer shooting (at least on new hardware) and the pacing of the matches could have made the experience more exciting when friends are with you in person.

Not that people won't have fun online in Titanfall (I would probably have gotten it on PC). I'm not surprised at the decision, nevertheless. I'm curious though why some people want it done away with, when I don't see why local and online can't co-exist.
 
Hopefully all the people who wouldn't want snapping apps to cut the size of screen play aren't wanting to cut the size of screen play with split screen. :)

This game having no split screen makes no matter to me. The game is going to be great. From what I've played this will be the new COD. This is what's finally going to make COD change itself to finally improve.

I can't wait for March.
 
Tagyhag said:
I find that pretty hard to believe [that more gamers play offline than online], at least in a first world country.
Click to expand...

You can check the breakdown of XBox 360 gold:silver:none members for clear evidence that that is indeed likely the case.

http://techland.time.com/2012/05/30...ty-at-67m-sold-this-is-why-no-new-xbox-at-e3/ = 67million XBox 360's sold. 40 million total (that is gold+silver) members. So we have no live at all = 27/67 = 40.3%.


http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...his-year-is-going-to-be-our-biggest-year-ever = 50% of all live accounts (again that is gold+silver) pay for gold.

That gives a rough breakdown that's in the ballpark of:

Gold = 30%
Silver = 30%
None = 40%

In other words the base ballpark figure for the number of gamers who don't game online is going to be around 70%. However there are potential confounding variables:

-Some gamers register more than one silver/gold account for themselves. This would increase the ratio of offonline gamers.

-Some gamers purchase a console and quit playing. This would inflate the ratio of silver and none accounts. However this is potentially balanced by how much spin Microsoft is using. Microsoft stated, "..Of our 25 million [Live] members, about half of them are subscribers for the business and pay us about $60 a year for that" "Subscribers for the business" is not well defined even though it's clear the implication he's trying to make. It could very well translate into "Account that has had been at gold status for at least 1 day." which would include anybody who activated one of the 3 gold trials that came with each system, for instance.

-The numbers are dated. Microsoft refuses to give clear numbers and instead prefers to randomly reveal bits and pieces of the puzzle. One article I referenced above is from mid 2012, the other in December 2010.

In general I think most confounding variables are going to end up bumping up the number of online gamers. However, I equally doubt that it's anywhere near enough to bring it up to > 50% so long as we agree that silver live subscribers are not "online gamers" as we're discussing. In any case I was genuinely interested in this topic and these numbers are what I was able to dig up. If somebody could find more recent reveals where the meaning of the words used is clear/unambiguous/trustworthy, we could try to get a more up to date picture.
 
nullref said:
Not surprising. It's likely a somewhat significant technical effort, and Respawn seems to be trying to focus their efforts as much as possible..
Click to expand...
Sometimes I wonder if they've focused their efforts too far. When you can spend the same amount for other games that have single player campaigns, offline bots, split screen play, and alternate modes (like Extinction or Zombies), Titanfall doesn't seem like a particularly great value unless the only thing you want to do is online competitive MP.

Throw in the fact that it's a console exclusive and I really wonder what sales will be like for this game.
 
At boarding school, split screen modern warfare was huge. People had a blast playing against each other. No split screen is... A shame.
 
I loved the 4 player split screen in Warhawk... I think that type of feature is still attractable.

just as long as the other gamers can use their gamertags/PS IDs.
 
I love the way Halo does things.

They allow for LAN hookups. They allow for 4 player offline splitscreen. Then they allow for 2 player splitscreen to go online, but they just put them into a separate playlist that allows such things.

PS: Mario Kart Splitscreen is better than Mario Kart online any day of the week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Halo: Campaign Evolved local split screen co op will need a Microsoft account in all platforms. [Update: No PS plus required for couch coop]
Drama  4 5 6 7 8
358
1K
Jimmy_liv replied
Emuplse (Titanfall from Splitgate Devs) EA Trailer
24
453
stickkidsam replied
Alinea Analytics estimate the physical/digital split from Playstations top selling games in 2026
2
75
229
Sohurmk833 replied
Insider Gaming: Splitgate Developer 1047 Games is Working on a Spiritual Successor to Titanfall, Dubbed ‘Empulse’
15
414
Dr. Samuel Hayden replied
ShatterRush- Titanfall 3 Is That You?
10
340
f~N_CH_1:3:3:3_SushiBoat replied
Top Bottom