Gogogic CEO Says Single-Player is a "Gimmick"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
...wut?!IamLEAM1983 said:It's "ad hominem", but close enough.Meatspinner said:
That's how I wrote it but spellchecker said no. Guess i shouldn't be so lazy with my english grammar. It's google spellchecker from now on.
I don't care if I have to copy paste a thousand times to complete a sentence. It will be done.
Despite the inflammatory initial comment. . . He actually raises an interesting point about the term "game". If you read the article and consider his points, he's not completely off base. I still disagree with some of his opinions but to completely dismiss the nature of his reply would be wrong.
BUT. With gaming nowadays, I think he misses the other aspect gaming has acquired. That it's not exactly a "Game" but in reality it also serves as an interactive story telling device.
BUT. With gaming nowadays, I think he misses the other aspect gaming has acquired. That it's not exactly a "Game" but in reality it also serves as an interactive story telling device.
Well he's technically right. The oldest games, chess, for instance- is technically a multiplayer PvP game.
Basically video game pushers when I was a kid needed to find a way to get you to play with yourself. I remember there was a sense that this was wrong then; to be shut in from everyone playing against a computer all day.
It's for this same reason that when I hit 13 and went into Jr. High in 1994; kids stopped playing Nintendo. They went into basements, attics, to the goodwill, they went away. If you played video games, you were not cool. You were a loser shut-in and you were a weird nerd that people avoided for fear of contagion.
It may seem laughable to call single player a gimmick now, that was my first reaction, but when you think about it- it does not have quite a history and there was a cultural revulsion to it as close as 20 years ago.
Context. Perspective. Get some.
Basically video game pushers when I was a kid needed to find a way to get you to play with yourself. I remember there was a sense that this was wrong then; to be shut in from everyone playing against a computer all day.
It's for this same reason that when I hit 13 and went into Jr. High in 1994; kids stopped playing Nintendo. They went into basements, attics, to the goodwill, they went away. If you played video games, you were not cool. You were a loser shut-in and you were a weird nerd that people avoided for fear of contagion.
It may seem laughable to call single player a gimmick now, that was my first reaction, but when you think about it- it does not have quite a history and there was a cultural revulsion to it as close as 20 years ago.
Context. Perspective. Get some.
What a pleb, that is meant as pure spin and nothing more.
It's all advertising and bullshit.
The large proportion of us in the UK, still don't have cheap or consistant access to the internet so single player is all we have to participate in, so try telling us it's just a gimmick... Jackass.
(Sorry, I hate that word but it was rather apt in the current scenario)
Until universal internet becomes a reality and we get rid of solitaire, crosswords, sudoku etc etc (both virtual and physical versions) then you cannot claim that "single player" is a gimmick or on the way out, because even the most social of us creatures enjoy our alone time.
It's all advertising and bullshit.
The large proportion of us in the UK, still don't have cheap or consistant access to the internet so single player is all we have to participate in, so try telling us it's just a gimmick... Jackass.
(Sorry, I hate that word but it was rather apt in the current scenario)
Until universal internet becomes a reality and we get rid of solitaire, crosswords, sudoku etc etc (both virtual and physical versions) then you cannot claim that "single player" is a gimmick or on the way out, because even the most social of us creatures enjoy our alone time.
hahahahahahaha
...
Oh you're serious?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Seriously this guy's an idiot. I see your social gaming and raise you one Skyrim/Mass Effect 2/Assassin's Creed 2.
And don't get me started on single player games with tacked on multiplayer (Mass effect 3 -.-)
Captcha: bath towel. Trying to tell me something internets?
...
Oh you're serious?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Seriously this guy's an idiot. I see your social gaming and raise you one Skyrim/Mass Effect 2/Assassin's Creed 2.
And don't get me started on single player games with tacked on multiplayer (Mass effect 3 -.-)
Captcha: bath towel. Trying to tell me something internets?
Am I the only person picturing him wearing sneakers? and also thinking "I don't think I should trust someone who thinks the Tenth Doctor was the pinnacle of good fashion sense?"
Sorry, all the useful points have been mentioned already and I want to jump in, so I'll make fun of his stupid, stupid suit.
Sorry, all the useful points have been mentioned already and I want to jump in, so I'll make fun of his stupid, stupid suit.
I know this is gonna sound insane Mr.CEO.
But please go die in a fire.
You are a large chunk of what's wrong with todays gaming industry.
And for the record, i actually like Multiplayer, i play waaay too much Tf2.
It's just that his statements are...just making him sound pretentious and is outright saying things that dont quite apply to todays market.
But please go die in a fire.
You are a large chunk of what's wrong with todays gaming industry.
And for the record, i actually like Multiplayer, i play waaay too much Tf2.
It's just that his statements are...just making him sound pretentious and is outright saying things that dont quite apply to todays market.
So, as I have always preferred playing SP games, I must prefer gimmicks... what the hell?
I don't play SP games because of my friends or lack thereof (not that I don't have any friends); I don't play SP games because I don't like playing with other people (I do play MMORPGs after all); I don't play SP games because of lack of alternatives (there is no lack of alternatives).
I play SP games because of the experience, for the stories, the roleplaying aspects, and because there are times I do prefer to not play with other people. Multiplayer games, however, are a gimmick, and while not always in a bad way - certainly a majority of games going MP have made them worse from my limited experience.
I don't play SP games because of my friends or lack thereof (not that I don't have any friends); I don't play SP games because I don't like playing with other people (I do play MMORPGs after all); I don't play SP games because of lack of alternatives (there is no lack of alternatives).
I play SP games because of the experience, for the stories, the roleplaying aspects, and because there are times I do prefer to not play with other people. Multiplayer games, however, are a gimmick, and while not always in a bad way - certainly a majority of games going MP have made them worse from my limited experience.
Well, from that article all I can take away is that the Gogogic CEO is a moron which is why he's at the kiddies table of gaming, making flash shit iphones and facebook instead of actual interactive worlds. Multiplayer is the less relevant of the two. Games have always been about entertaining the one who plays it and requiring the use of a second human to provide that entertainment is lazy and wrong. Games are about single-player first and multi player second.
You cannot have sweeping, epic storylines like Baldur's Gate, Deus Ex, Mass Effect or Skyrim if multiple players are all "special". In the case of most modern games, taking EA's as examples, ME3 and the forthcoming DS3, multiplayer is the gimmick. And a shitty gimmick it is too, one I'd prefer to do without.
TOR is the first game that I've encountered that handled this reasonably well. It struck a fine balance between epic story arcs, giving multiple player's unique roles and personal histories, allowing all to make preferred choices but playing only one at random, making a minigame out of it.
TOR is the first game that I've encountered that handled this reasonably well. It struck a fine balance between epic story arcs, giving multiple player's unique roles and personal histories, allowing all to make preferred choices but playing only one at random, making a minigame out of it.
The Escapist's own commentators have already [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5014-How-Skyrim-Proves-The-Industry-Wrong#] explained [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/6832-On-Multiplayer] why single-player isn't "just a gimmick", not a lot more to add.
Wow. Another win for poor journalistic presentation. A good article with a bad headline to draw people in, and then everyone who comments basically acts like they only read the headline. "OHHH, HE CALLED SP A GIMMICK!" Really people? You can't read the article and see what he's getting at? I'm not saying he's right, but the argument in the article isn't dumb. It's just a headline that's meant to set people off and boy did it ever set you people off.
While I disagree with his idea of single player becoming a gimmick, the man does sort of have a point with the last sentences of his quote.
Before I accidentally start something I don't want to, I need to reemphasize that I love games of almost all types, single player included and am not siding with the "Single player is a gimmick" thing (which I can't find him actually saying within the article).
It also kind of ruins the whole point out awesome single player games as a counter example.Andy Chalk said:
Before I accidentally start something I don't want to, I need to reemphasize that I love games of almost all types, single player included and am not siding with the "Single player is a gimmick" thing (which I can't find him actually saying within the article).
But... they're making an Elder Scrolls Online...Auberon said:
OT: Are people really getting worked up over the parroted words of a person that most of us have likely never heard of before? The guy doesn't make games designed to appeal to the people he's talking down on, and I doubt he has the power to encroach on the space of all those Deus Ex's and Elder Scrolls and Final Fantasy's and Fallout's and Fable's and God of War's and so on and so on.
And it could just be a mistranslation. Happens all the time.
I dislike multi-player whenever I can help it, too, but you're not much better if you're adopting a mob mentality of hatred just at the mere mention of the word.
Yes, except Multiplayer games usually suck because of...wait for it...OTHER PEOPLE.
Nothing ruins a game like other people do. Just last night, had a fun game of TF2 going...and a hacker shows up and ruins the server with his speedhack/wallhack/aimbot for a good 30 minutes before he finally left.
In fact, I don't think I've ever played a heavy multiplay game that wasn't ruined by other players.
I'll stick to properly crafted single player experiences, thank you.
Nothing ruins a game like other people do. Just last night, had a fun game of TF2 going...and a hacker shows up and ruins the server with his speedhack/wallhack/aimbot for a good 30 minutes before he finally left.
In fact, I don't think I've ever played a heavy multiplay game that wasn't ruined by other players.
I'll stick to properly crafted single player experiences, thank you.