Battlefield 3 - You Can't Play Online With Friends! (No Split Screen)

UsernameInUse

I've just come across this "vaguely important" piece of information that is quite honestly, the make or break point for me when it comes to purchasing games. I love nothing more than cracking open a couple of beers with a few friends - it's why we loved COD; now I see BF3 is not including a way to play on Xbox Live with friends via split-screen? What the hell is this?

I really wanted BF to destroy MW this year, I really did - but that's it. It's not even out yet and I've already given up on it. It's totally destroyed any anticipation I've had all these months. What were Dice thinking of? Are they out of their minds??????? They've shot themselves in the foot. They better buy a saddle so COD can ride them in comfort...

BlitzKrieg

obvious troll is obvious?

UsernameInUse

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

obvious troll is obvious?

Not trolling at all.

This is the reality as far as I've heard....if you can discredit that, I'd love for you to prove me wrong. If it's the truth, then that's just how I feel...BF3 loses points for no Xbox Live Split Screen.

UsernameInUse

What I wanted to know was whether or not I can play Caspian Border, Tehran Highway, Metro etc on one Xbox (Split screen) on Xbox Live with friends?

If now, it's a joke by default...

BlitzKrieg

Lets rephrase this.

When has battlefield ever had split screen mutliplayer?

Thats why I thought troll.


Its kind of like going at DICE for not including custom emblems or kinect support?

They never done it and they never intended to do it.

I know COD have reintroduced split screen multiplayer with black ops, but tetrayach (the 2nd cod developers) pushed that idea with black ops (and earlier cod 3) but infinity ward like DICE never dabbled in it.

I always thought split screen online multiplayer was mostly a HALO trait myself. Rarely see it in other games.

UsernameInUse

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Lets rephrase this.

When has battlefield ever had split screen mutliplayer?

Thats why I thought troll.


Its kind of like going at DICE for not including custom emblems or kinect support?

They never done it and they never intended to do it.

I know COD have reintroduced split screen multiplayer with black ops, but tetrayach (the 2nd cod developers) pushed that idea with black ops (and earlier cod 3) but infinity ward like DICE never dabbled in it.

I always thought split screen online multiplayer was mostly a HALO trait myself. Rarely see it in other games.

Oh right - well, this is my first BF game.

I've played split screen all my life - it's the deal breaker for me. To be sure we're on the same page here, I'm not talking about extra's like Spec Ops or Zombies here. I'm actually talking about friends getting together in real life, sitting down with two controllers and one xbox, and playing via split screen a game of BF3 over Xbox Live on Multiplayer maps such as Metro and Caspian Border.....

I refuse to believe this is not the case....

This is the ultimate kick-up-the-arse the MW3 supporters (not me, until this very moment) will use to run this game into the ground and into the depths of irrelevance.

BlitzKrieg

wouldnt agree with it being a huge issue.

I'm sorry its a deal breaker for you though.


Personnally I think split screen fps really needs to be with games of certain design. The reason I think Halo and Gears of War work so well with it is because the notion of team in both those games can be applied to a pair of players and not necessarily any further.

Battlefield on the other hand works with the notion of squads and one only needs to look at their advertising campaign for bad company 2 to see that they really put the emphasize behind bf squads being more then 2 players. SO Co-op would disrupt that in my opinion because it locks half the squad away into their own little groups.

I can understand why Trayarch (keep mispelling their names) did it with their Call of Duty entries because they emphasized fun loose gameplay over the tighter more intensive run and gun of the ones designed by infinity ward (which also explains the dip in quality in those same titles) So this new MW3 being with pretty much a mostly restaffed infinity ward will be a curious one with them pushing elements more closely found with the less popular treyarch entries then the tighter IW ones.

There is also the very obvious answer on top of all this which is to do split screen takes a great deal of optimisation of your engine. Frostbite 2 is not only a very powerful engine that is taxing both consoles it is also a brand new one, so split screen might not have even be attempted on it.

And finally the PC was the lead platform in the design process and PC's dont do split screen. They do online.

EIREHotspur

It isn't an unfair point to make but as you said, the fact that PC is the main platform, that is probably why it has not been looked at so far.

I mentioned this elsewhere but it is a pity there are not more game types in Battlefield. COD flaming aside, more gametypes would be great with vehicles....you can't get that in COD.

If there were no Vehicles in Battlefield I wouldn't buy it over COD.

Dermighty

UsernameInUse wrote: »

I've just come across this "vaguely important" piece of information that is quite honestly, the make or break point for me when it comes to purchasing games. I love nothing more than cracking open a couple of beers with a few friends - it's why we loved COD; now I see BF3 is not including a way to play on Xbox Live with friends via split-screen? What the hell is this?

I really wanted BF to destroy MW this year, I really did - but that's it. It's not even out yet and I've already given up on it. It's totally destroyed any anticipation I've had all these months. What were Dice thinking of? Are they out of their minds??????? They've shot themselves in the foot. They better buy a saddle so COD can ride them in comfort...

Who cares. Go buy a pc!

BlitzKrieg

The issue with so Many gametypes is it forces a compromise on the map design. One only need to look at how the maps change between rush and conquest to know that a lot of work went into making these maps work. I like cod but I'll be among the first to say there are maps where certain gamemodes do not work and feel very forced. So For me 9 maps designed to work really well in 2 gametypes is better then 9 maps where they work in 7 but the quality varies from map and gametype

djrichard

I think you will find that one reason why there isnt split-screen, is becase the consoles can just about run the game without the screen being split. The graphics are already much lower quality compared to the pc version, to implement split-screen would require them to be reduced even further.

The gameplay on Battlefield games doesnt require split-screen action. The game isnt designed for two friends to sit together on the one tv. If you want to play with the two of you in the one room sitting having a beer together, which I can understand the attraction of, then simply have two tvs and two xboxes with 2 copies of the game. Then you can both have full screen each and benefit from imporved graphics.

For the OP to state that this is a dealbreaker for the game is ridiculous, fair enough it might be a dealbreaker for him, but I doubt you will find many gamers out there upset about this. To say that COD fans will run this game into the ground due to this is embarassing and makes me question myself for replying to a post which appears to have been written by a 12 year old kid.

Do you think DICE could care less if some COD fanboys want to waste their lives discrediting their games? It all adds to the hype and will generate conversations and that will result in sales.

To be honest, Im so unbelievably bored of every post about this game having some mention of COD in it and then that debate starts, followed closely by a console vs pc debate. Its complete and total drivel and just turns me away from the general gaming community and to seek the sanity of my gaming clan which vets every member and wont tolerate all that mince.

cherryghost

They sacrificed shiny graphics and extra features for destruction 2.0 and I'll be honest, I kind of regret they did, especially for consoles.

djrichard

Enderman wrote: »

They sacrificed shiny graphics and extra features for destruction 2.0 and I'll be honest, I kind of regret they did, especially for consoles.

Last night I was playing through the single player on ultra settings on pc. There was a part when I was moving as part of a three man squad through an office building, taking cover behind desks, filing cabinets and the buildings concrete pillars. As the enemy started engaging me, chunks would fly off the pillars just the same way that they did in that lobby scene in the Matrix. Suddenly I could no longer just hide in one spot as my cover was literally being destroyed in front of me. It was one of those gaming moments which are becoming more rare these days, when you suddenly sit back and gawp in amazement at what youre seeing and experiencing. The physics on the bodies of players is incredible also, they are animted so life like and they seem to have a proper weight about them, as if you can see the physics at work as a bullet makes contact.

I wont ever forget taking cover behind a concrete pillar, as bits of it are sent flying all around me as the enemy attacks my position, suddenly I step out with my scope raised and as I raise my sites up I fire a little earlier than I intended, the bullet hits him in the shin and he drops down to one side as he clearly feels the pain, as he scrabbles to take cover, I hit him with a headshot and his head snaps back and he slumps to the ground dead, I quickly double tap a couple of bullets towards a flashlight which has blinded me and I hear the scream as they hit my victim, just as I manage to dive behind a steel filing cabinet for cover and to reload.....

Its been a while since a game felt this good.

cherryghost

No no I'm not ridiculing it at all. TBH I think its great but it just doesn't suit the consoles. You can see for yourself the game was dumbed down to add destruction 2.0. IMO they should have kept it off the consoles and upped the features and graphics.

It suits powerhouse PCs, but for consoles no no. It's just getting some average reviews because of this.

EIREHotspur

I think you will find that fanboys are potential buyers and of course they care about getting those people to at least try their game.

COD Players are FPS Players.

If you read any press release or interview they anticipate getting some COD Players buying BF3.

They would not be in the games business long if they deride or fail to convert some of those people.

djrichard

Enderman wrote: »

No no I'm not ridiculing it at all. TBH I think its great but it just doesn't suit the consoles. You can see for yourself the game was dumbed down to add destruction 2.0. IMO they should have kept it off the consoles and upped the features and graphics.

It suits powerhouse PCs, but for consoles no no. It's just getting some average reviews because of this.

I agree there.

I remember reading somewhere that consoles are generally sold at a loss, and they make the money longer term with peripheral and game sales. Anyone have any idea how long the period is for a typical console user to spend enough for Sony/Microsoft to be in profit? I wonder if this is the reason why there has not been much news about the next gen consoles, perhaps enough time hasnt passed and they are trying to stretch it out as they have a big user base now and its profit time.

Maybe with the release of BF3, it will put pressure on the console manufacturers to release new tech as disgruntled console owners consider a pc, or at least complain as the inevitable gap widens over time.

Probably not. Its actually amazing what the consoles can do for such a small amount of money, especially as we get nearer the end of a consoles life and the programmers have worked out more efficient ways of programming them and they eek out every last bit of power.

Lord Nikon

I see your dissappointment with no split-screen, but in fairness, since this is your first Battlefield purchase, you shouldn't assume it will have all the features you want.

Surely, before you bought BF3 you read the reviews or something. They have been talking about the features for months now, as well as posting screenshots and video after video on numerous websites. It didn't say or show split-screen anywhere. Surely, this is the time you should decide not to buy the game.

P.S. Welcome to BF, the best game ever.