Use to split screen the crap out of Starcraft 64. Its fun to 2 human v 2 cpu with out the hassle of online lag. Its nice to have a friend next to you while we game instead of rotating controller like we did with halo wars. It will be controller oriented. I dont see why we cant splitscreen. Tvs are a lot bigger than they were back then.
I think its just going to be single player like the last one. They trashed it in the main series, i doubt they will put it in the side game. (This is figuring they r going to up the grafics and textures)
That would be awesome.
I don’t think they will. It would push the hardware too hard, and unless you have a large TV, it wouldn’t be practical.
Splitscreen for an RTS isn’t as practical as it is for an FPS. You need to have a large area of view to properly control your units and economy.
A nintendo 64 could handle this task exceptionally well. I lack to see how an 8 core processor unit wouldnt be able to exceed these expectations. Even if they did “up” the graphics and textures, do you really think two friends playing splitscreen are going to be talking about seeing a frame drop here or there? Highly unlikely. They will be sitting back pounding down a few beers, wings, and pretzels. My friends always meet up and hang out playing local play. It is sad to see -Yoink!- using practice to force online play so they can up there console sales. I am sure plenty of gamers out there would enjoy this option. Say they have a sibling or child who wants to play with you but now they cant. You have to go out and buy another console and game? No wonder why Nintendo is the top selling overall console company. They see bigger picture of family and social interaction.
As I said, I don’t think it will happen.
As for it being done on N64 with Starcraft 64
> The Brood War missions required the use of a Nintendo 64 memory Expansion Pak to run.[65] In addition, StarCraft 64 features a split screencooperative mode, also requiring the expansion pak, allowing two players to control one force in-game.[66]
The system required a boost to do it.
The system can lower settings slightly on the xbone one if it really struggled for split-screen capability. It can easily be done with to days technology. It wouldn’t hurt single player graphics or performance to have this option.
The expansion pack was required because it was basically needed for the superior games. They were producing games better then the console itself. Which is what they still do today. Compared to PC, xone and ps4 graphics dont compare. The console versions get watered down because they purchase a bottleneck system. So instead of being able to boost consoles they switched out and lowered graphic settings.
> 2791293519059100;7:
> The system can lower settings slightly on the xbone one if it really struggled for split-screen capability. It can easily be done with to days technology. It wouldn’t hurt single player graphics or performance to have this option.
>
> The expansion pack was required because it was basically needed for the superior games. They were producing games better then the console itself. Which is what they still do today. Compared to PC, xone and ps4 graphics dont compare. The console versions get watered down because they purchase a bottleneck system. So instead of being able to boost consoles they switched out and lowered graphic settings.
I don’t follow your logic in your argument. What do the boldened sentences have to do with anything?
You [first] said that N64 could produce splitscreen coop for SC 64. I pointed out that it couldn’t without the use of the N64 Expansion pack. A standard N64 could not produce splitscreen. That argument is done.
I understand that lowered settings would allow for it, but as you would know from watching/playing SC64, the screen play-area was very reduced in size (part of each splitscreen was allocated to stat trackers, making the game easier to render - smaller resolution - less area to render units in simultaneously)
That is not an experience you want for an RTS where you need large screen realestate to effectively control your units and economy.
Furthermore, splitscreen in a versus capacity would be pointless as you could see exactly what your enemy is doing, which defeats the element playstyle of RTS’s. Scouting, adapting, countering.
i dont think they will
> 2533274809541057;8:
> > 2791293519059100;7:
> > The system can lower settings slightly on the xbone one if it really struggled for split-screen capability. It can easily be done with to days technology. It wouldn’t hurt single player graphics or performance to have this option.
> >
> > The expansion pack was required because it was basically needed for the superior games. They were producing games better then the console itself. Which is what they still do today. Compared to PC, xone and ps4 graphics dont compare. The console versions get watered down because they purchase a bottleneck system. So instead of being able to boost consoles they switched out and lowered graphic settings.
>
>
> I don’t follow your logic in your argument. What do the boldened sentences have to do with anything?
>
> You [first] said that N64 could produce splitscreen coop for SC 64. I pointed out that it couldn’t without the use of the N64 Expansion pack. A standard N64 could not produce splitscreen. That argument is done.
>
> I understand that lowered settings would allow for it, but as you would know from watching/playing SC64, the screen play-area was very reduced in size (part of each splitscreen was allocated to stat trackers, making the game easier to render - smaller resolution - less area to render units in simultaneously)
>
> That is not an experience you want for an RTS where you need large screen realestate to effectively control your units and economy.
>
> Furthermore, splitscreen in a versus capacity would be pointless as you could see exactly what your enemy is doing, which defeats the element playstyle of RTS’s. Scouting, adapting, countering.
The point being a n64 can splitscreen rts. You are trying to argue that the n64 couldnt. Why does it matter if it needed more ram like other n64 games did as well. If you read my post i was stating 2 humans vs 2 cpu never did i say 1v1. The bold sentences have to do with a work around since you are so upset the n64 needed an expanison pack to run the later games due to they were better then what the original n64 could handle. The expansion is part of the n64. So therefore the n64 could run the game. End of discussion. Any why bother listening to you, rts dont have splitscreen https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/38bd6e2ebbb14e5b9b359bb029588800/topics/split-screen-or-crash/0ebae95a-c271-42fb-a66a-422576b4b9a6/posts
Noo…
> 2791293519059100;10:
> > 2533274809541057;8:
> > > 2791293519059100;7:
> > > The system can lower settings slightly on the xbone one if it really struggled for split-screen capability. It can easily be done with to days technology. It wouldn’t hurt single player graphics or performance to have this option.
> > >
> > > The expansion pack was required because it was basically needed for the superior games. They were producing games better then the console itself. Which is what they still do today. Compared to PC, xone and ps4 graphics dont compare. The console versions get watered down because they purchase a bottleneck system. So instead of being able to boost consoles they switched out and lowered graphic settings.
> >
> >
> > I don’t follow your logic in your argument. What do the boldened sentences have to do with anything?
> >
> > You [first] said that N64 could produce splitscreen coop for SC 64. I pointed out that it couldn’t without the use of the N64 Expansion pack. A standard N64 could not produce splitscreen. That argument is done.
> >
> > I understand that lowered settings would allow for it, but as you would know from watching/playing SC64, the screen play-area was very reduced in size (part of each splitscreen was allocated to stat trackers, making the game easier to render - smaller resolution - less area to render units in simultaneously)
> >
> > That is not an experience you want for an RTS where you need large screen realestate to effectively control your units and economy.
> >
> > Furthermore, splitscreen in a versus capacity would be pointless as you could see exactly what your enemy is doing, which defeats the element playstyle of RTS’s. Scouting, adapting, countering.
>
>
> The point being a n64 can splitscreen rts. You are trying to argue that the n64 couldnt. Why does it matter if it needed more ram like other n64 games did as well. If you read my post i was stating 2 humans vs 2 cpu never did i say 1v1. The bold sentences have to do with a work around since you are so upset the n64 needed an expanison pack to run the later games due to they were better then what the original n64 could handle. The expansion is part of the n64. So therefore the n64 could run the game. End of discussion. Any why bother listening to you, rts dont have splitscreen https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/38bd6e2ebbb14e5b9b359bb029588800/topics/split-screen-or-crash/0ebae95a-c271-42fb-a66a-422576b4b9a6/posts
I pointed out that the N64 couldn’t without the use of an expansion pak. A standard N64 could not run splitscreen starcraft. That was my point. It needed an add-in unit to run the game in splitscreen mode even with reduced resolution.
We are not discussing other games. We are discussing Starcraft 64 and its splitscreen mode.
I am not upset. Where did that come from?
The expansion pak is an additional unit. It was not standard.
And what is that link there for? It’s a thread where a guy complains about the lack of splitscreen IN HALO 5. Not in Halo Wars. Show me a modern RTS that has splitscreen and was successful.
> 2791293519059100;7:
> The system can lower settings slightly on the xbone one if it really struggled for split-screen capability. It can easily be done with to days technology. It wouldn’t hurt single player graphics or performance to have this option.
> The expansion pack was required because it was basically needed for the superior games. They were producing games better then the console itself. Which is what they still do today. Compared to PC, xone and ps4 graphics dont compare. The console versions get watered down because they purchase a bottleneck system. So instead of being able to boost consoles they switched out and lowered graphic settings.
The PC has always had graphics a league ahead of the consoles, regardless of generation. Even StarCraft 64 was watered down from the PC version, which I managed to run on a Windows 95, 486 DX 75mhz, 32Mb of Ram and an S3 Virge just fine.
Heck in the PS1 and N64 era you could theoretically play games in full high-definition (1080P) on the PC, something that consoles still struggle to achieve today, almost in 2016.
Regardless. Today our screens are larger, have a higher resolution, you would think split-screen gaming would be more advantageous than in prior generations.
> 2533274809541057;6:
> As I said, I don’t think it will happen.
> As for it being done on N64 with Starcraft 64
>
>
> > The Brood War missions required the use of a Nintendo 64 memory Expansion Pak to run.[65] In addition, StarCraft 64 features a split screencooperative mode, also requiring the expansion pak, allowing two players to control one force in-game.[66]
>
>
> The system required a boost to do it.
Irrelevant.
The expansion pack just increased the Nintendo 64’s memory capacity from 4Mb to 8Mb. The Xbox one has 8,192Mb of Ram, my PC has 32,768Mb of system memory. (Plus 16,384Mb graphics memory in total.)
Split-screen from a technical perspective is more than possible on the Xbox One.
RTS games are typically far more CPU heavy than GPU heavy, which is also ironically one of the only aspects that the Xbox beats the Playstation in.
> 2533274820740639;13:
> The expansion pack just increased the Nintendo 64’s memory capacity from 4Mb to 8Mb. The Xbox one has 8,192Mb of Ram, my PC has 32,768Mb of system memory. (Plus 16,384Mb graphics memory in total.)
> Split-screen from a technical perspective is more than possible on the Xbox One.
> RTS games are typically far more CPU heavy than GPU heavy, which is also ironically one of the only aspects that the Xbox beats the Playstation in.
With better hardware, comes a whole slew of improvements for Halo Wars such as better resolution, FPS, probably higher population counts, and more. The only issue I see with adding split-screen would be cutting some of the features mentioned above in order to accomadate a feature typically not implemented in RTS. Halo 5 runs 1080p and 60 FPS, but even with Xbox One hardware(which isn’t the most powerful in comparison to high end PCs), split-screen didn’t make the cut for performance issues. Would fans rather see higher population counts and improved fidelity or split screen support? I’m sure it’s possible to implement splitscreen, but if it comes at the cost of cutting other features it shouldn’t be implemented.
> 2717573882290912;14:
> With better hardware, comes a whole slew of improvements for Halo Wars such as better resolution, FPS, probably higher population counts, and more. The only issue I see with adding split-screen would be cutting some of the features mentioned above in order to accomadate a feature typically not implemented in RTS. Halo 5 runs 1080p and 60 FPS, but even with Xbox One hardware(which isn’t the most powerful in comparison to high end PCs), split-screen didn’t make the cut for performance issues. Would fans rather see higher population counts and improved fidelity or split screen support? I’m sure it’s possible to implement splitscreen, but if it comes at the cost of cutting other features it shouldn’t be implemented.
This is how I see it.
Possible, but at what cost?
I hope so, and hope that we are given that answer soon.
Probably not!
> 2533274809541057;15:
> > 2717573882290912;14:
> > With better hardware, comes a whole slew of improvements for Halo Wars such as better resolution, FPS, probably higher population counts, and more. The only issue I see with adding split-screen would be cutting some of the features mentioned above in order to accomadate a feature typically not implemented in RTS. Halo 5 runs 1080p and 60 FPS, but even with Xbox One hardware(which isn’t the most powerful in comparison to high end PCs), split-screen didn’t make the cut for performance issues. Would fans rather see higher population counts and improved fidelity or split screen support? I’m sure it’s possible to implement splitscreen, but if it comes at the cost of cutting other features it shouldn’t be implemented.
>
>
> This is how I see it.
>
> Possible, but at what cost?
i agree it will come at a heavy cost
Split screen is not possible in an RTS without creating a huge gap in single player. You have to render everything twice, and unlike an fps, where graphics and physics are taking up the majority of the power, all the AI is taking up the power. Reducing the frame rate won’t help you like an FPS, because it is not the source of your issue.
We can only hope…