Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[Gruelius]

We would KILL for split screen. While it would destroy the competative aspect and not be used by that many users (as now days we have servers and internet connections not just one console) it is still worth doing. quite often me and about 6 others meet up at a mates house and play eye on the 64. Weve been waiting to play eye in full hd on a 52" hdtv, i tried setting up a pc with proj 64 and usb adapters but proj64 wasnt emulating goldeneye properly, lots of little glitches we noticed.

While this isnt a emulation its a remake with new features i think it would be awesome if we could  get split screen. This is by no way a complaint as GE source is allready awesome but if its technically possible it would be awesome!

anyway thats my 2c

[Mangley]

I think the closest that you'll be able to get to split screen is playing over LAN and having two monitors next to eachother.

From a technical perspective it's just not viable. Source is only designed to support one player per machine, and the entire optimisation of maps in Source are dependent on the machine only having to render the map from one perspective. Rooms and models that aren't visible from their position are not rendered, and even having two player displays through one GPU would screw this hard.

Also I think the entire code for player control would need to be recoded, as it only allows for input for one player.. it doesn't comprehend more than one user's inputs.

All in all, it would basically require an entirely different game engine, most likely built from the ground up to get a functional split screen experience, and even then 2 player displays would be optimistic at best.

[killermonkey]

and not be used by that many users

You answered your own question. Why go through the development of an extremely complex feature if it is never going to be used?

[Gruelius]

if more console like features get added to future versions of the source engine i would hope it wouldnt be as hard.

Just because not everyone would use it doesnt mean it shouldnt be considered, just means it should be at the bottom of the to do list (which id be happy about, better than not at all).

again not complaining, but it shouldnt be shot down just because it seems like an extreme feat. Rare did many things outside the box for making its n64 games and they were fantastic.

but yes it is a pc game and i realise that split screen has no use for pc's these days.

[Hixbot]

i realise that split screen has no use for pc's these days.

I wish we could break that mentality.  PC games should offer every feature console games offer.  With the ease of playing on a HDTV, multiple gamepads/keyboards/mice etc,  PC could be great for local multiplayer.  It's sad to see big games like black ops come with online splitscreen on consoles, while the pc version gets none of it.
Developers are favouring console these days, and it's getting pretty pathetic.  I think if the PC developrs could focus on making a platform wide standard for local and online/local multiplayer, server locks on input devices etc we'd see the PC come back in a big way.

Not to mention what multi-monitor setups could do for local play.

Obviously I'm not talking about goldeneye here, just PC gaming in general.

[Enzo.Matrix]

The most practical use for split screen would actually be spectator mode.  But once again, the effort vs bonus is not worth it at this current time.  Other features are of much greater importance at this time.

I will state that L4D 1 Did/does have a top/bottom split.  But this would have been left over from the xbox version.

[Rodney 1.666]

again not complaining, but it shouldnt be shot down just because it seems like an extreme feat.

In this case "extreme feat" is an understatement. The rewards just aren't worth the near-impossible task at this point of the game.

~Edit for I-didn't-read-Enzo's-post-there.
[/repeat]