If you’re going to go to that effort to for broke. I have 6 displays on my PC. Let me run all 4 player slots at once. I still have 2 left for web browsing and streaming video.
Well, I know you CAN run 2 sets of kbm (or more) just fine. For instance if someone does a lot of programming and has a bunch of boards set up with 10000 macro’s. It’s just not a common usage.
The last only time I did 2-player on a single computer, we each had our own end of the keyboard to use. The game had been programmed to access the raw key codes so it could distinguish between the left and right sets of alt, shift, and ctrl keys. I have no idea what the game was, though!
there are plenty of games with split screen on PC so i don’t think that would be a problem and controllers are fine imo but having the flexibility to use multiple keyboards or a mix would be nice, you can do so much with PC that i can even see each player using one monitor, something consoles can’t really do
yeah i don’t think sharing a keyboard would work very well in this case haha but multiple controllers, keyboards or a mix probably wouldn’t be that hard to port since it’s already implemented in consoles
I won’t ever be using it. I need space to sprawl on my throne. But more power to you.
I don’t get it, if you will never play split-screen why bother commenting this post? This post is not for you, we dont need your useless comment.
There are many PC games that support kb/m + gamepad for 2 player split-screen. And split-screen is already there in console code. Devs just think its not important enough for PC. And when we want to voice our opinion, people make useless comments. Plenty of people uses mod to play BL2 and TPS on same PC. At least I hope they don’t remove this modding feature.
Edit: Sorry, I replied to the wrong person.
Okay, settle down there.
If you aren’t interested in a thread: don’t post in it.
If you see a post that’s problematic: flag it.
Please read the forum rules, thanks.
As someone that has multiboxed 5 different accounts of World of Warcraft at the same time on one monitor I can say with authority that there is no monitor related limitation to displaying as many different viewpoints of a game as the developers program for. As to inputs - anything that can be done on a console can be done on a PC. Certainly if one wished to simplify inputs controllers could be used instead of a mouse and keyboard, but, again, that is a programming issue, not a hardware one.
Sorry to bump, but I’m another who would very much like to have split-screen co-op support on PC.
My gaming PC is a compact Mini-ITX system hooked up to an HDTV and it’s great for playing with a controller, or multiple, but so few PC games bother to include split-screen support, even when the code already clearly exists for the console versions.
I’m not interested in multi-monitor support, just give me the same feature the consoles have and let me worry about whether my monitor/TV is any good for it or not, it’ll still be infinitely better than not having the feature at all.
Currently the biggest games with proper local co-op support on PC are the lego games, which to be fair, do do a good job of scratching my colourful mayhem itch, but I’d prefer to do this with a Borderlands game without having to run two or more full copies of the game using third party tools.
Heck, we could even use splitscreen in windowed mode to s t r e t c h it across two monitors without devs having to code in multiple displays. Let the OS deal with it! Or let us run two instances of the game? In two windows?
Does Windows support that? And does Steam support having more than one user signed in and active under the same Windows user? (Just curious about this as it’s not a situation I’ve ever had to deal with.)
I know that if you have a window (like a web browser) you can kinda let it hang out between two screens on Window’s OS. Not sure about Mac… but I would bet so. I can guarantee it would be an ugly solution to multiple screens, though!
I am pretty sure Steam/Epic won’t support multiple users – but that’s what SHiFT is for, right? So our characters can go cloudward, and the game instance only has to deal with distinguishing control inputs. I bet it’ll be quite taxing to run, though.
As far as multiple instances, I was envisioning a sort of wrapper program that can handle web services and feeds two windows, each running the game and tracking inputs *independently*. Kind of like how web browsers run – if you open Task Manager, and exit tabs one by one, you can watch tasks disappear until your last tab has several tasks open, which all close together.
No, not really. Borderlands saves have always been local, not server based. The SHIFT system doesn’t have anything to do with that; nor does it track achievements/trophies or manage matchmaking - all of that is done through the specific platform (Steam, XBox, PS).
Battleborn had server-side saves and matchmaking, but only because of the competitive element. That’s actually quite an infrastructure to maintain for a non-competitive title, so I very much doubt it would be applied to BL3.
If Steam and/or Epic don’t support simultaneous users on the same physical PC, you’re left with user + anonymous guest as the only local co-op option. So the second user couldn’t keep progress and items between sessions and would always start over from scratch. (Well, I suppose a developer could allow a guest to use one of their other save files, but that’s not the same as playing your own character with your carefully farmed gear!)
On the playstation, we were able to use cross-save for one character via (I think) SHiFT’s cloud. I do know it’s a lot of infrastructure – but it seems to be in place on some scale.
And why not allow anonymous guests to save files locally/to a flash drive? That’s probably super exploitable, so I may have just answered my own question. But the loot instancing seems to help with just inviting a friend over for a playthrough, even if they have to start the skill tree over each time.
At least it would be local co-op, even if it’s not perfect!
Or let us run two instances of the game?
You can do this using a third party tool called Nucleus Co-op, which I believe you can also tweak to use multiple displays (I haven’t tried, as my gaming PC only has the one).
The problem with doing local co-op this way is it doubles the demands on your system to run two full copies of the game, more-so even if they have to share resources too much; a single copy with proper split-screen support is much more efficient. Maybe not a huge deal since the Borderlands art-style means it still looks good on lower settings, so a decent GPU should handle it.
I’m mostly concerned with the HDTV/big screen couch co-op scenario though; the code to do this already exists in the console ports, so it shouldn’t take much work to just make that available as-is for PC too, even if they have to slap a disclaimer up about it, I’d be fine with that, as I know it’d be fine for my setup.
Regarding profiles; again I’m not sure if that’s a big deal really; progress is saved locally so it shouldn’t really matter if you can have multiple profiles or not, the only issue is making sure your friends can get the right character. If you’re playing as a pair that’s easy, as one is the main, one is the guest. For three or more players, just let them pick, or assign the saved characters in controller order (worst case, you swap controllers around).
That looks like an awesome tool. I’ll have to try it out!
I’m not sure it’s actually via SHIFT? It’s a bit of an outlier regardless because you can only manage one file at a time like that. Plus, on XBox, it’s only a a 1-way transfer (apparently something imposed by MS).
SOME of us have TWO monitors, or secondary tv to hook up to their PC’s and idk if you’re aware but SOME ppl have CONTROLLERS. lol