>muh split screen
If a game has LAN capabilities, then just use that. Split screen isn't a necessity anymore, you're basically crying over the loss of morse code.
>It's too expensive! You have to buy an extra console with its own set of peripherals just so you can play with anyone, and even then you won't be playing side by side!
Yeah, it's expensive, but video games in general are expensive. How much did your PC cost? Anywhere between 400 dollars and 2500 dollars? Besides, you don't have to buy another console, you can just expect the people with whom you'd like to play to have their own setup. When LAN parties were a thing, did the organizers of the event expect you to bring your own shit or not? I also don't get why it's so important for you to have your opponent in the same exact room with you. Why can't you, say, go to your friend's house, play an online match with them while in the same room but on two different consoles or devices, and then sperg out about the outcome of the game as you would have if you were playing split screen? If that's not the point of split screen, then explain why you want it so badly.
I will admit, though, that most games don't come with LAN options these days, but the argument against those is the same as the argument against split screen: it's unnecessary when you can use your game console or PC to instantly communicate with anyone across the globe, including your friends and family.