Editor's note: Garret and his brothers bonded over video games, so who better to champion the cause of splitscreen multiplayer? He makes some good points, but I can't help think that as the average gamer grows older, splitscreen multiplayer becomes less and less important. At least the Wii is keeping multiplayer gaming alive in the living room. -Demian
I come from a relatively simple family: neither of my parents attended college, video games were silly toys, and a computer never entered the confines of our house until I was in high school. Yet, somehow I turned out to be a tech-savvy (soon-to-be) computer engineer who whittles away a large portion of his time in front of a monitor with a controller in hand. My brothers never took to gaming as much as I did, but growing up, whenever we got together (they're both much older than I am), we always enjoyed firing up a game console and playing some good old-fashioned splitscreen multiplayer. It sounds strange, but whether we were playing GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Red Faction 2, or something else, it was a way for us to bond and have some good fun. We maintain the ritual to this day.
Almost too many good times to remember on this well-known GoldenEye map.
Of course, not everything is the same. Soda has been replaced with beer, we play on a bigger TV with a fancier controller, and my brothers have even less time to follow current gaming news.
When I got together with one of my brothers a couple weeks ago and told him that I got the new Red Faction, he was pretty stoked (Red Faction was one of our all time favorites). Of course, I had to regrettably inform him that while it's a fantastic game, it doesn't have splitscreen multiplayer. He couldn't believe it. I realized it had been ages since I played splitscreen myself — the last time was likely over Christmas when we played Left 4 Dead. Even then, only two of us could play at once, while the other sat out and watched. It dawned on me that while online multiplayer is a great convenience, there's nothing quite like the experience of sitting down with a couple of good friends and enjoying each other's company while playing with or against them.
The omission of splitscreen is a growing trend this generation, no doubt. Hell, even splitscreen's PC cousin, the LAN party, is going the way of the dodo. After having an absolute blast with my brother over the weekend (more fun than I remembered), I've been busily racking my brain over the last week or two, trying to come up with a reasonable answer for why online gaming has entirely replaced — instead of adding on to — splitscreen multiplayer. I'm not sure there is one.
Consider Left 4 Dead. Why not have four-player splitscreen? It makes so much sense it's almost mind-boggling — a game that features four characters pitted against an apocalyptic zombie infestation with only themselves to rely on. Wouldn't it only be logical to let that experience pan out with four people who can see each other, who know each other, who can punch each other in the arm if somebody sets everyone on fire?
Certainly, playing online is a tremendous convenience (although if you think about it, wading through menus and hunting for good server ping times just to talk with my friends over a microphone is hardly convenient). It's great on a busy weeknight or when your friends don't live close to you — I understand that. But who can honestly say that they prefer online play to sitting around with a bunch of friends, particularly for cooperative games (no screen-watching)? The greatest limiting factor has usually been screen size, and if anything the availability of HDTVs and large screen sets make this less of an issue than ever before. I'm befuddled.
L4D splitscreen is fun, but only supports two players.
Developers might be at fault here — the convenience of online play and the ratio of how often a given person will play online to how often they will play splitscreen gives online play priority in the development process. I understand that, and I'm not arguing on those grounds. But how much additional effort is really needed to mash up four screens on a TV? The interface might have to be changed around a bit — maybe show less of the guns and modify the HUD. It seems as though developers just aren't including splitscreen because it won't affect their bottom-line. After all, few would boycott a game with no splitscreen, but any game forgoing online multiplayer in favor of offline splitscreen is dead in the water [editor's note: Wellllll I don't know about that. Wii Sports?). It's supply and demand at its finest.
But just because something is more convenient doesn't mean it's better. If you ask me, the experience of splitscreen with friends trumps playing online any day. In a perfect world, I don't see why we can't do both. I'd like to say that Left 4 Dead 2 and Modern Warfare 2 will sport some great splitscreen options (actually, World at War had a pretty fun splitscreen mode), but I'm not holding my breath. Either developers will have to step up and deliver the full multiplayer experience, or my brothers and I will have to play five-year old games that we already have.