Welcome to 2006.

Split screen co-op is soooo PS2 era.

PRE-ORDER CANCELLED

I cancelled my pre-order when I found out that Camaro's were not in the game.

You want 15 frames per second with framedrops splitscreen 720p? :/

People actually thought that was going to happen?

I feel like developers have pretty much given up on split-screen by now.

Split-screen is still widely used for those who have friends over/brothers or sisters.
 
Anyways, I figured it wouldn't.  Game would probably die FPS-wise trying to do split-screen on a console as good as it looks.

I loathe the antiquated use of split-screen co-op. However the alternative isn't one, which is to say buying individual copies etc. So the real solution is for your brothers to play something that was made for local co-op from the beginning and play Battlefield 3 by yourselves.

That sucks. I can understand the technical limitations, but not having split-screen in games is one of my least favorite trends this generation.

It's a PC game 
  
I don't think I have enough keys on my keyboard either way

@kashif1 said:

Black Ops did it, Halo did it, Modern Warefare two did it so noone tell me it can't be done.

Different games are... different?

Welcome to 2006.

Black Ops did it, Halo did it, Modern Warefare two did it so noone tell me it can't be done.  

Black Ops did it, Halo did it, Modern Warefare two did it so noone tell me it can't be done.

Yeah, that's a bummer. I'll be more disappointed if/when Timesplitters 4 comes out, and that's not split-screen co-op, and multiplayer. 

@kashif1 said:

Black Ops did it, Halo did it, Modern Warefare two did it so noone tell me it can't be done.

And Split Second had giant exploding building generated by cars. Why don't Black Ops, Halo and modern Warefare (Yes, Warefare) do it?

But does it have this kind of coop? 
 

@pornstorestiffi: Very good.

You're already buying the crappier version (it's a PC game, sorry), and now you're complaining that they won't institute last-generation console tropes?

Why the fuck would it have local coop? Most games don't, and Battlefield certainly has no reason to. That's so 1997. Get out your multitap, buddy. You'll need it for Crash Team Racing.

Serious Sam 3 has four player co-op. On a PC. 
 
MADNESS.

@eroticfishcake said:

Serious Sam 3 has four player co-op. On a PC. MADNESS.

Local though? If so then yes but otherwise nothing to see here.

@pornstorestiffi: probably, seriously why have there been so many games recently where you can kill chickens?  Its like all the kids who grew up on zelda have now gone on to make fpses and want their revenge.

@Jack268 said:

It's a PC game I don't think I have enough keys on my keyboard either way

This.

@pornstorestiffi said:

But does it have this kind of coop?

lol'd

Is this what you meant?

@eroticfishcake said:

Serious Sam 3 has four player co-op. On a PC. MADNESS.

Local though? If so then yes but otherwise nothing to see here.

@Tuffgong said:

@eroticfishcake said:

Serious Sam 3 has four player co-op. On a PC. MADNESS.

Local though? If so then yes but otherwise nothing to see here.

Ah yes local. But then again they've had local co-op with their past SS games so it's kinda expected.

@eroticfishcake said:

@Tuffgong said:

@eroticfishcake said:

Serious Sam 3 has four player co-op. On a PC. MADNESS.

Local though? If so then yes but otherwise nothing to see here.

Ah yes local. But then again they've had local co-op with their past SS games so it's kinda expected.

wait how does that work on a pc?

@Tuffgong: Haha, that's precious! Could do with some enlarging, but absolutely fantastic, though for some odd reason I am reminded of S.T.A.L.K.E.R when looking at it. Probably the world's most literal easter-egg.

As for the TC, it's a PC-Game. PC games don't have local co-op. PC games are too pretty to be shared, and honestly, if you had to process BF 3 on your PS3 twice, albeit at lower resolution, you'd plainly need to buy another PS3 anyway. 'Cause it'd melt, you know. It's a paradox in a sort, because with or without co-op, you'd have to buy an additional console. And on that "note".

Less games are being made with co-op in mind, and while that's a shame for any console player, it's quite natural when you think about it. PC gaming is, and always will be, pushing the boundries on what can be done in terms of graphical quality. Now that our precious consoles are starting to come of age, they can barely keep up as it is. Heck, just look at "RAGE", also a primarily developed PC-game. I think it's shipping on 4 DVDs for the 360, either that or they'll have to reduce the quality even further. Co-op might sound easy to make, but it really isn't when you think about it, because all of a sudden, you have to render double the amount of information on the screen, which quite naturally calls for hardware twice as powerful. It says quite a lot about just how old the engines are which locally-supported co-op games run on.

Is this what you meant?

Is this what you meant?

@Ahmad_Metallic: Thank you, I'll be here all week!

@Xolare: We're not talking about that right now but we'll have some exciting announcements at PAX.

@Xolare: We're not talking about that right now but we'll have some exciting announcements at PAX.

That sucks. I can understand the technical limitations, but not having split-screen in games is one of my least favorite trends this generation.

Call of Duty - Modified Quake 3

Battlefield 3 - Frostbite 2

Oh weird, I clicked on this thread but then remembered it's not the 1990's.

@MaFoLu: Not Halo

We all have bothers, duder, we all do. 

I always found split screen co-op a pain in the ass.

I too have bothers.

@Xolare said:

@kashif1 said:

Black Ops did it, Halo did it, Modern Warefare two did it so noone tell me it can't be done.

And Split Second had giant exploding building generated by cars. Why don't Black Ops, Halo and modern Warefare (Yes, Warefare) do it?

Hes not commenting on whether or not BF3 should do the same thing, he's just pointing out that they could have put it in.