Killzone

[Makkendaali]

I´m not saying its a good thing that Killzone 3 won´t feature an online co-op mode, yes that would certainly improve the game but the more and more I hear people whining about the lack of this mode the more I´m reminded of how much online co-op gaming just sucks.

Maybe it just comes from growing up playing couch co-op Contra with your brother, barking orders at one another and yelling like a bunch of maniacs. Growing through one console generation to the next, playing Assult Retribution on the PS1 splitscreen, Battlefront on the original Xbox splitscreen, Gears of war splitscreen has been the ideal way for me to play.

Whereas when you play online co-op, it feels less like actually playing WITH someone and more like just having one of your companion AIs behaving slightly more realistically. Then you have to deal with additional prompts, lag, people wanting to skip through cutscenes as well as the dreadful fate of progressing the story only to have the connection screw up or the servers go down or some other nonsense. Don´t even get me started on pairing up with some random, most likely headsetless douche to play co-op, that´s not fun at all.

Play with a family-member or invite a buddy over. That´s what co-op has always been about. Two people yelling at the same TV-screen.

[Mr_Chronic91]

---

Makkendaali wrote:

I´m not saying its a good thing that Killzone 3 won´t feature an online co-op mode, yes that would certainly improve the game but the more and more I hear people whining about the lack of this mode the more I´m reminded of how much online co-op gaming just sucks.

Maybe it just comes from growing up playing couch co-op Contra with your brother, barking orders at one another and yelling like a bunch of maniacs. Growing through one console generation to the next, playing Assult Retribution on the PS1 splitscreen, Battlefront on the original Xbox splitscreen, Gears of war splitscreen has been the ideal way for me to play.

Whereas when you play online co-op, it feels less like actually playing WITH someone and more like just having one of your companion AIs behaving slightly more realistically. Then you have to deal with additional prompts, lag, people wanting to skip through cutscenes as well as the dreadful fate of progressing the story only to have the connection screw up or the servers go down or some other nonsense. Don´t even get me started on pairing up with some random, most likely headsetless douche to play co-op, that´s not fun at all.

Play with a family-member or invite a buddy over. That´s what co-op has always been about. Two people yelling at the same TV-screen.

---

I have to agree, split screen FTW!!

[AstroZombie1]

---

Makkendaali wrote:

I´m not saying its a good thing that Killzone 3 won´t feature an online co-op mode, yes that would certainly improve the game but the more and more I hear people whining about the lack of this mode the more I´m reminded of how much online co-op gaming just sucks.

Maybe it just comes from growing up playing couch co-op Contra with your brother, barking orders at one another and yelling like a bunch of maniacs. Growing through one console generation to the next, playing Assult Retribution on the PS1 splitscreen, Battlefront on the original Xbox splitscreen, Gears of war splitscreen has been the ideal way for me to play.

Whereas when you play online co-op, it feels less like actually playing WITH someone and more like just having one of your companion AIs behaving slightly more realistically. Then you have to deal with additional prompts, lag, people wanting to skip through cutscenes as well as the dreadful fate of progressing the story only to have the connection screw up or the servers go down or some other nonsense. Don´t even get me started on pairing up with some random, most likely headsetless douche to play co-op, that´s not fun at all.

Play with a family-member or invite a buddy over. That´s what co-op has always been about. Two people yelling at the same TV-screen.

---

I  highly disagree online co-op can be at times much more fun than multiplayer and most definetly more than split screen (more screen real estate for a start) L4D with friends is a shining example of this and it's a crying shame that GG decied to omit this from the story mode me and my 2 mates we planning an all nighter on the story the day we get it.

Really put a dampner on my excitement when I found out it was offline split screen only.

[kainora_2010]

Both arguments have their merits. However, the ONLY true advantage to online co-op is the screen real estate, and if you're like me and my girlfriend, all that just becomes fluff when you realize that HDTV screen sizes make splitscreen viewing just fine.

I, like Makkendaali, remember playing on small ***** CRT TVs with a "19 or maybe a 28" diag. screen size. Now that was a little bit of a problem, but once the shooting starts all those problems are replaced by the fun of the game!

So, I have to say true co-op should be couch bound other wise it might as well be multiplayer.

A caveat: If  a person has two PS3s in one home and two HDTVs of 42" or larger, then I would also argue for online coop or lan coop! That's probably truly the best of all co-op playing methods!

Kaigh

[Occident]

The arguement that co-op is offline only is great. At least if you're a boring dinosaur.

I remember the good old master system and original NES days but with time comes technology and improvements.

Online co-op gaming doesn't suck, its just another way to cut out the neccesity of living close to a friend/person who wants/likes the same game, and arranging to get together. Its not always possible to arrange this when you feel like it. The friends I game with most regularly live in different parts of London, not to mention friends in Scotland, Liverpool and just about all corners of the UK.

As for not playing WITH someone I've never had problems enjoying a campaign with friends online, switch the mic on and have some laughs and its just as good. Some awful games have been playable simply because of the online available. Playing with randoms can ruin this but thats just the chance you take playing with strangers however if you want to play co-op when no friends are available at least the option is there.

The argument that lag, connection issues are valid but only as much as saying campaigns are bad because some of them don't have good graphics or controls. You rate a games network as much as any other feature. If you can't stay connected the games bad and its the developers fault for being so lazy.

Finally the screen size is the most important for one simple reason. It's not the 1980's anymore and co-op does not mean 2 player. What if a game is 4 player campaign or even 5 or 6. Once upon a time you couldn't do this but the technology now means you can create a campaign with as many people taking part as you wish. Keeping things 2 player means staying in another decade.

There's nothing bad about offline co-op, it is good but online is just as good. Its not a matter of which is better, whats important is they give us THE OPTION.

[Cloudedpaul]

---

Occident wrote:

The arguement that co-op is offline only is great. At least if you're a boring dinosaur.

I remember the good old master system and original NES days but with time comes technology and improvements.

Online co-op gaming doesn't suck, its just another way to cut out the neccesity of living close to a friend/person who wants/likes the same game, and arranging to get together. Its not always possible to arrange this when you feel like it. The friends I game with most regularly live in different parts of London, not to mention friends in Scotland, Liverpool and just about all corners of the UK.

As for not playing WITH someone I've never had problems enjoying a campaign with friends online, switch the mic on and have some laughs and its just as good. Some awful games have been playable simply because of the online available. Playing with randoms can ruin this but thats just the chance you take playing with strangers however if you want to play co-op when no friends are available at least the option is there.

The argument that lag, connection issues are valid but only as much as saying campaigns are bad because some of them don't have good graphics or controls. You rate a games network as much as any other feature. If you can't stay connected the games bad and its the developers fault for being so lazy.

Finally the screen size is the most important for one simple reason. It's not the 1980's anymore and co-op does not mean 2 player. What if a game is 4 player campaign or even 5 or 6. Once upon a time you couldn't do this but the technology now means you can create a campaign with as many people taking part as you wish. Keeping things 2 player means staying in another decade.

There's nothing bad about offline co-op, it is good but online is just as good. Its not a matter of which is better, whats important is they give us THE OPTION.

---

completely agree, there is only one person i enjoy playing games with because we are both the same skill level and have a really good laugh playing games together, unfortunatly he lives in america!

[MikLSP]

I wholly agree that splitscreen multiplayer modes should be in every game. It's bad that so many games have ditched offline modes for exclusively online multiplayer. The thing is though that people want online as well.

Simply put games should have online AND offline multiplayer, not one at the cost of the other.

[Hyperguy20]

---

MikLSP wrote:

I wholly agree that splitscreen multiplayer modes should be in every game. It's bad that so many games have ditched offline modes for exclusively online multiplayer. The thing is though that people want online as well.

Simply put games should have online AND offline multiplayer, not one at the cost of the other.

---

^^ This