Roleplayer’s Off Topic Thread #19

[Celan]

2 hours ago, BigBossBalrog said:

By that logic, all Single Player games are all the same, and the Elder Scrolls is exactly the same as the Witcher. 

I can go with that.

2 hours ago, ColonelKillaBee said:

Nigga no, that's why they differentiate between multiplayer and mass multiplayer. Your beef isn't even with mass multiplayer games, its specifically MMO RPGs... which neither of those are lol, not even close.

Anyway, merry christmas lol, stubborn ass woman.

My beef is with multiplayer.

[ColonelKillaBee]

13 minutes ago, Celan said:

I can go with that.

My beef is with multiplayer.

...

Inquisition has multiplayer. Therefore you like MMO RPGs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can't group all multiplayer games with MMO RPGs... they are nothing alike. Dislike multiplayer games all you want lol but know what you're talking about. I dislike MMO RPGs for the grindiness and monetization of pretty much everything, and those things go hand in hand. 

Games like Overwatch, Halo, Ark, borderlands, they don't have these characteristics. I have nothing against multiplayer, and I understand that you do but disliking multiplayer doesn't suddenly make them all the same. It's not even an opinion, you're factually wrong here.

Borderlands is probably the closest to this sort of "grind", and Overwatch has loot boxes for cosmetics, and if you care about that, the random lootboxes you earn might feel like a "grind" but it pales in comparison to a real mmo and how slow the grind is solely to get people to take short cuts with their cash.

I can make comparisons to a grand majority of the games you like to all sorts of things you claim not to like, but it doesn't make them the same.

[BigBossBalrog]

I think it always comes down to apples and oranges. It's like what I said earlier, generalizing entire genres (multiplayer games, which isn't even a fucking genre, it's like an umbrella term for games were multiple people can play at the sane time, is just as stupid.

I like doing it sometimes here to mess with ya'll (because I know you hate it ) but it's like saying Elder scrolls, Witcher, and [redacted] are the exact same thing (and they all suck) cause there RPG's. It's a disservice to countless devs in my opinion to say all multiplayer games are the same and they fucking suck cause there multiplayer, despite them being nothing alike at all. Or at least that's how I view it

[ColonelKillaBee]

Agreed. I understand people not liking multiplayer, and I get it, the multiplayer scene is making single player games suffer because gaming publishers continue trying to cash in on its success.

That sucks, it does, but that doesn't suddenly make every multiplayer game ever suck or the equivalent of an MMORPG. We have these names for a reason. 

Having no interest in playing them is one thing, but you can't argue about what is and isn't an mmorpg when you don't even know what the game is like or what it's about aside from the fact that you can play with others... 

[Celan]

1 hour ago, ColonelKillaBee said:

...

Inquisition has multiplayer. Therefore you like MMO RPGs.

You can't group all multiplayer games with MMO RPGs... they are nothing alike. Dislike multiplayer games all you want lol but know what you're talking about. I dislike MMO RPGs for the grindiness and monetization of pretty much everything, and those things go hand in hand. 

That's an arena mode that is completely separate from the actual game. It detracts from developer resources, other than that I don't have an issue with it. Not that I'd ever play it.

But no, they do share characteristics and what they share is what makes them bad. I'm not going to bother arguing it, as it comes down to preference.

1 hour ago, BigBossBalrog said:

It's a disservice to countless devs in my opinion to say all multiplayer games are the same and they fucking suck cause there multiplayer, despite them being nothing alike at all. 

I don't care.

[ColonelKillaBee]

7 minutes ago, Celan said:

That's an arena mode that is completely separate from the actual game. It detracts from developer resources, other than that I don't have an issue with it. Not that I'd ever play it.

But no, they do share characteristics and what they share is what makes them bad. I'm not going to bother arguing it, as it comes down to preference.

I don't care.

And I don’t care what your preferences are, know what you’re talking about before you trash it.

Like you said, your beef is with multiplayer games in general, and yea, the games I listed are certainly guilty of that. But what makes an rpg bad isn’t their similarities to multiplayer games because borderlands is multiplayer and has good story and characters... that’s not exclusive to single player.

What makes rpgs bad is when they try deviating from the rpg mold, in general. What made inquisition bad was trying to be an open world rpg... it wasn’t trying to be “mmorpg”, and tbh even mmorpgs aren’t as empty as that game was. RPGs can be bad all on their own without having anything in common with mmos. See Dragon Age 2.

[ColonelKillaBee]

Like I said like twice or thrice now, I really don’t care if you like multiplayer games or not, you made it clear already you’re not really interested in games in general anymore, but know that that means you have a very limited view on gaming in general as it is today and you can hardly blame anyone for going “huh?” When you start dumping on a game you have never even heard of before and group in with something entirely different, just because it has one similar feature... online gaming.

Especially when earlier you just grouped ALL multiplayer games together but then went and defended the one game with online that you play just because I accused it of being an mmo same as you did.

And I can tell you @Celan Inquisition is far more mmo esque than Overwatch is. Both in play style, game type and world design.

Plus, overwatch is literally just an online team based shooter. You may as well call call of duty an MMORPG.

Thats why I’m dumping text on you right now. You’re being ridiculous.

[Celan]

Witcher 2 had an arena mode, too. It was an entirely separate game, had nothing to do with the base game- so it's not the gotcha point you make it out to be.

I do know what I'm talking about. No I haven't played those games, and there's a reason why. Borderlands didn't have much of a story at all. It was entertaining for its goofy humor, but gameplay wise I didn't like Borderlands, either. Again, there's a reason these games are bad. They're made to dump as much useless, repetitive content into a game as possible, because developers know some people will play them for the social element and not notice or care.

[ColonelKillaBee]

Im not trying to be a dick but you don’t. You can’t say that when you just called Overwatch an MMORPG.

And it’s the point I wanted it to be because you just grouped every multiplayer game into the same category and only now defend some because you get now that they’re all not the same thing.

And for example you can play ark single player all by yourself and people often do... but you still grouped it in with every other multiplayer game out there.

[ColonelKillaBee]

Especially when you’re saying “these games” in relation to Borderlands 2 which had excellent characters and story. Especially Tales.

[Celan]

7 minutes ago, ColonelKillaBee said:

Im not trying to be a dick but you don’t. You can’t say that when you just called Overwatch an MMORPG.

And it’s the point I wanted it to be because you just grouped every multiplayer game into the same category and only now defend some because you get now that they’re all not the same thing.

And for example you can play ark single player all by yourself and people often do... but you still grouped it in with every other multiplayer game out there.

I'm not defending any of them- I think they're all bad. But the arena had nothing to do with the actual games.

"You can play it SP" can be said of many games, including Borderlands, doesn't mean they were developed as SP games. As for Overwatch, the distinction you're making is simply negligible IMO. "Team based multiplayer" vs MMO is difference without a distinction in my book.

Loot boxes also come out of multiplayer too, because people are trying to compete in the grind and show off.  I think it's a huge waste of time and money, all of them- but I never said you have to agree.

[BigBossBalrog]

2 minutes ago, Celan said:

I'm not defending any of them- I think they're all bad. But the arena had nothing to do with the actual games.

"You can play it SP" can be said of many games, including Borderlands, doesn't mean they were developed as SP games.

Loot boxes also come out of multiplayer too, because people are trying to compete in the grind and show off.  I think it's a huge waste of time and money, all of them- but I never said you have to agree.

Loot boxes have no correlation with multiplayer. Halo Reach and [redacted] have multiplayer, but aren't grindy at all. A bunch of singleplayer games have loot boxes for god's sake. 

Loot boxes aren't born from multiplayer game, there born from corporate greed. 

[ColonelKillaBee]

6 minutes ago, Celan said:

I'm not defending any of them- I think they're all bad. But the arena had nothing to do with the actual games.

"You can play it SP" can be said of many games, including Borderlands, doesn't mean they were developed as SP games. As for Overwatch, the distinction you're making is simply negligible IMO. "Team based multiplayer" vs MMO is difference without a distinction in my book.

Loot boxes also come out of multiplayer too, because people are trying to compete in the grind and show off.  I think it's a huge waste of time and money, all of them- but I never said you have to agree.

But it’s still a multiplayer game... the combat was even developed with multiplayer in mind, so it’s not entirely just a tacked on feature.

Ark is 100 percent a multiplayer game, I never said otherwise. But it’s not an MMORPG. My only point in bringing that up was to say multiplayer games aren’t all the same as you suggested earlier. 

And again, I don’t at all care what your opinion is of the games I like to play. That’s not what I’m arguing against. What I’m arguing against is this attitude of “they’re all shit, they’re all the same to me” so much that it’s to the point that you have to be told a team based shooter isn’t an mmorpg.

You don’t gotta like or try anything but you can’t expect me to just swallow what you say about games I enjoy when you’re so incredibly off base here. I wouldn’t expect you to listen to what I have to say on a subject I know nothing about while trashing it. And yes, you gotta actually play these games or similar ones to know what you’re talking about, or at least watched videos to see for yourself.

 

[Celan]

8 minutes ago, BigBossBalrog said:

Loot boxes have no correlation with multiplayer. Halo Reach and [redacted] have multiplayer, but aren't grindy at all. A bunch of singleplayer games have loot boxes for god's sake. 

Loot boxes aren't born from multiplayer game, there born from corporate greed. 

From Wikipedia  

Loot box concepts originated from loot systems in massively multiplayer online role-playing games, and from the monetisation of free-to-play mobile gaming. They first appeared around 2007 to 2010, but since then, appear in many free-to-play games and in some full-priced titles.

 

 

[Celan]

Just now, ColonelKillaBee said:

But it’s still a multiplayer game... the combat was even developed with multiplayer in mind, so it’s not entirely just a tacked on feature.

Ark is 100 percent a multiplayer game, I never said otherwise. But it’s not an MMORPG. My only point in bringing that up was to say multiplayer games aren’t all the same as you suggested earlier. 

And again, I don’t at all care what your opinion is of the games I like to play. That’s not what I’m arguing against. What I’m arguing against is this attitude of “they’re all shit, they’re all the same to me” so much that it’s to the point that you have to be told a team based shooter isn’t an mmorpg.

You don’t gotta like or try anything but you can’t expect me to just swallow what you say about games I enjoy when you’re so incredibly off base here. I wouldn’t expect you to listen to what I have to say on a subject I know nothing about while trashing it. And yes, you gotta actually play these games or similar ones to know what you’re talking about, or at least watched videos to see for yourself.

 

The last time we discussed this subject I listed the multiplayer games I've played/tried, don't gotta do it again.

Witcher is a multiplayer game? Bullshit.

Anyway, I can't believe we've gone on for two pages about an offhand comment.

[ColonelKillaBee]

12 minutes ago, Celan said:

From Wikipedia  

Loot box concepts originated from loot systems in massively multiplayer online role-playing games, and from the monetisation of free-to-play mobile gaming. They first appeared around 2007 to 2010, but since then, appear in many free-to-play games and in some full-priced titles.

 

 

“Originated” doesn’t mean anything about it is an mmorpg... 

Unless you’re gonna tell me this is an mmorpg because it has stats:

 

[ColonelKillaBee]

2 minutes ago, Celan said:

The last time we discussed this subject I listed the multiplayer games I've played/tried, don't gotta do it again.

Witcher is a multiplayer game? Bullshit.

Anyway, I can't believe we've gone on for two pages about an offhand comment.

Yea and it was like, one maybe two games. 

You’re right, it is bullshit, which is why I used your logic to call it such. You know what else is bullshit is calling Overwatch and Ark an MMORPG lol, and it’s the same reaction I had. 

The comment(s) warranted it.

[Celan]

8 minutes ago, ColonelKillaBee said:

“Originated” doesn’t mean anything about it is an mmorpg... 

Unless you’re gonna tell me this is an mmorpg because it has stats:

Irrelevant. I said loot boxes came out of multiplayer games, that illustrated it.

If you think an offhand comment warrants a long argument, whatever... I'm tired of it.

[ColonelKillaBee]

3 minutes ago, Celan said:

Irrelevant. I said loot boxes came out of multiplayer games, that illustrated it.

If you think an offhand comment warrants a long argument, whatever... I'm tired of it.

Balrog only said that to show multiplayer games aren’t all about a grind, just because mmos spawned lootboxes. 

He was wrong about there being “no” correlation but his point was accurate.

I dunno what to tell you but I’m not gonna stay silent or ignore comments that are blatantly mistaken, certainly not about things I enjoy. 

We jump on everyone else here for the same thing.

[ColonelKillaBee]

20 minutes ago, Daddy Solaire said:

So I got soulcaliber 6. Time for me to go make myself.

Just pick Geralt. Better yet, fuck that game and go to Witcher.

[ColonelKillaBee]

8 minutes ago, Daddy Solaire said:

Bruh you continuing to tell me to play the witcher is pushing me away from it

The weak willed don’thave what it takes to be a Witcher anyway

[BigBossBalrog]

You should play Witcher 3 because it's an excellent title 

[Celan]

3 hours ago, ColonelKillaBee said:

Balrog only said that to show multiplayer games aren’t all about a grind, just because mmos spawned lootboxes. 

He was wrong about there being “no” correlation but his point was accurate.

I said people use lootboxes to get around the grind, which they do. Conversely multiplayer games use the grind to sell loot boxes, like the controversy about Battlefront requiring 40 hours of grind time to unlock major characters when you could buy them. That's how those two things are related, and why they're both examples of the poor development that comes out of that type of game. It's in the very nature of the games, in a way that it's not in SP. Though more developers are trying to sneak that stuff into SP games, too.

Anyway, peace on earth, etc. etc.

[ColonelKillaBee]

3 hours ago, Celan said:

I said people use lootboxes to get around the grind, which they do.

I already know you dislike multiplayer games, but the multiplayer games I played like halo, like borderlands, ark, etc had none of that. Just because developers decide to get greedy doesn't mean it's intrinsic to multiplayer games. There's literal years of examples to prove you wrong. Everyone here reading this knows exactly what I'm talking about, because they've played them.

MMOs, sure but not all multiplayer games. The gross monetization of multiplayer games is a new thing, relatively, and even so, there's plenty of multiplayer developers that do not do this, such as the makers of divinity original sin, and the games I just listed. 

And Battlefield is EA, they grossly monetize everything including single player games, Dragon Age and Mass Effect both, before either had any multiplayer.

Peace on earth indeed and you can say what you like after this, but you are wrong. I’ll leave it at that.

[Celan]

Tbh I didn't read all that, can't take text without paragraphs. But it's sickening to realize that the top revenue for EA, Activision etc. now is "extra digital content." It teaches developers to purposely release incomplete games.

And no, @ColonelKillaBee- I never said all multiplayer games have microtransactions. You're arguing about things I never wrote. I said MT's came out of those games and they did, end of story. Now you can invent arguments I never made and type "you're wrong" a few more times if it suits you.

One thing you're right about, I'm more and more sick of the hobby and where it's going.