NJ5 said:
Team Fortress 360/PS3 versions are just an afterthought, ports without much value. Valve's games are designed for PC where splitscreen is useless on games requiring mouse.
I certainly don't think they were afterthoughts but I agree Valve games are PC first. The game still went on to sell over a million copies between the two systems (Almost 1 million on Xbox 360 alone).
I mentioned MK:Wii since it proves that online splitscreen is a popular feature at least on the Wii. I agree it's a good feature...But the question is how good? Some games benefit from it. Some don't. I personally like Warhawk's 4 player multiplayer (On or Offline). I don't think two games that have yet to be released have suffered from focusing on graphics too much. Not every game needs split-screen. There really isn't many games that do splitscreen well anyways.
Regarding the last part of your post, why is it that Halo 3 and other popular FPS games support splitscreen or are getting late patches to add it? Split Screen is a good feature but the cost/reward of actually implementing it, quite honestly isn't unless the game is widely popular. Halo did build popularity off of split-screen multi-player. (It was a feature that they needed to keep since the original two had it). Again comparing the PS2/XBOX/N64/Gamecube generations to the current Wii/PS3/360 is Apples to Oranges. There wasn't a well designed robust online system for any of the previous systems. Multi-player HAD to be done with split-screen. However, Halo 3's graphics in general suffered by the inclusion of these modes in the game. Some would say it's worth it. Some would say it's not. Maybe people would have been more impressed with Halo 3's presentation/single player had it been a better looking game?
|







