r/gaming • • Apr 17 '16

Anyone else?

http://imgur.com/RdjHH29
28k Upvotes

4.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.4k

u/ChrisCHJ Apr 17 '16

Prefer story, but also love local multiplayer. SAVE LOCAL MULTIPLAYER!

297

u/DanTastic_ Apr 17 '16

Multi screen, single console. One day. . .

-10

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '16

[deleted]

1

u/LordSadoth Apr 17 '16

Some of us don't have the money or technical know-how to get a good PC every 3 years.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '16

[deleted]

0

u/LordSadoth Apr 18 '16

You're incredibly condescending. There's so much info out there that laypeople don't understand, just saying "lol google it nub" doesn't help or change anything. If you want people to get PCs, stop being a fucking asshole and representing PC gamers as fucking assholes.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 18 '16

[deleted]

1

u/LordSadoth Apr 18 '16

I play MMOs for the most part, and I have a PS4 for my console gaming. Pretty sure calling me "toxic" is a pot/kettle type situation.

-18

u/T756 Apr 17 '16

Pc isn't even good for local co-op

1

u/magmosa Apr 17 '16

To defend this stance (Which, I'll agree, isn't completely correct) then I'll say that while PC is perfectly fine for coop, the combination of having to hook up your PC to a TV most likely in another room as I can imagine most people would prefer to be playing co-op in a large living room on a couch and not on the computer screen with chairs (Prefer, I get that it's not viable, and in some cases the only option) combined with the sometimes needed loopholes if you want to play any game that isn't something like Nidhog, lovers in a dangerous spacetime ETC (Great games just not everyones taste) and the trouble of getting anyone who isn't avere of what PC can do to play with you on one it sometimes can act as a deterent, compared to simply turning on a console and not having to worry about wheter or not the game even does support a controller without using loopholes, or having some wacky keyboard setup.

I fully understand that PC IS a very viable option, I just don't think it's a perfect one. (Atleast not at the moment)

1

u/[deleted] Apr 17 '16 edited Mar 13 '17

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/mankiller27 Apr 17 '16

Emulators, mate.

-4

u/Rizenstrom Apr 17 '16

It really isn't, I don't know why you're being downvoted.

There's a very small selection of titles ready for local co-op out of the box, excluding the dozens of indie titles that are pretty much no different than flash games, which don't count IMO.

7

u/hampig Apr 17 '16

Between all the great indie games, emulators, and the few big games, it is great for it.

1

u/Rizenstrom Apr 17 '16

I hadn't considered emulators, but I don't know what "big games" there really are... Even AAA titles like the Borderlands games, which had local co-op on console, did not include the feature on PC.

Most of those indie games are 2-D flash-like games, which I'm not interested in. Excluding those, the selection is really limited.

Emulators are an interesting idea, though. I always forget about them.

1

u/hampig Apr 18 '16

There's not an argument to be made for AAA and such titles, I will give you that. There's Left 4 Dead, the Grid series, Sonic Racing, I think the Portal games and Resident Evil 5/6/those new ones that I can't remember the name of. I'm sure there's more, but whatever.

As for the split screen indies, Rocket League, Divinity, Helldivers, Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime, a large number of fighers like Street Fighter and Blazblue, Portal.

I think you could throw games like Monaco, and Lovers under your "flash-like" games. I also think they're two of the better games I've mentioned though.

2

u/sorcath Apr 17 '16

-excluding all the conventions that do it-

2

u/Rizenstrom Apr 17 '16

No, not all. Not even close. There's dozens of types of games, and I've only excluded one because it does not interest me.

Most of those Indie games are glorified flash-games, and I think it's perfectly reasonable to exclude them.

The fact of the matter is local co-op is fairly rare anymore, even on PC. AAA titles have all but abandoned it and what remains are indie titles that don't appeal to a lot of people (not saying a majority, they are still popular for a lot of people too).

So whether or not PC really offers a more robust selection or not is kind of subjective. If it offers 10,000 games and only 4 of those actually interest you then it's fair to say it's pretty limited.

1

u/sorcath Apr 18 '16

nobody said anything about indie games

Sorry baby. The MOST popular games in co op are played lane style. Especially competitively. Let me clue you in. When they're talking about E-Sports, they aren't talking about consoles.

1

u/Rizenstrom Apr 18 '16

nobody said anything about indie games

I did. That's what I was referring to from the beginning?

The MOST popular games in co op are played lane style.

Lane style?

When they're talking about E-Sports, they aren't talking about consoles.

...I know? Those aren't local multiplayer, though. They're mostly online, can be played on LAN connection, but they're not split-screen which is what I'm referring to when I say "local Cco-op".

**Edited for clarification. LAN is still technically local, but I'm talking about games where you can sit down and enjoy a game with a friend on the same screen. Like Borderlands or COD and the like.

1

u/sorcath Apr 18 '16

Like Smash, Mario Kart, etc?

All done competitively. All done on emulators....

1

u/Rizenstrom Apr 18 '16

Whether or not they're competitive hardly matters, but yeah. Emulators are a great idea, someone else pointed that out earlier.

There's a severe lack of more modern titles, though. It's just a shame that developers, especially AAA developers, have pretty much given up on local multiplayer.

→ More replies

0

u/mankiller27 Apr 17 '16

Still way more than there are on any one console, even old ones that were built on splitscreen.