Jimquisition: Only The Lonely

[Myndnix]

The day gaming goes full multiplayer is the day I stop playing games.
Screw multiplayer. Other people suck. I don't spend money on a game so I can play it with other people. It's something I bought for me.
While I do play multiplayer in what some would view as a 'limited' fashion, only playing with my close friends and never touching any kind of gametype in which you'd play against or with total strangers, I have never bought a game based on it's multiplayer. Multiplayer isn't even a factor!

Thank 'god' for you, Jim.

 

[fleischwolke]

This installment really hit the nail on the head for me. My day is filled with scheming hominids, and pc games are a chance to get away from it all. Single player all the way!

 

[mike1921]

snip

snip

I really can't wrap my head around the idea that you honestly think that calling 90% of the world's population idiots for not thinking the exact same way as you is a good idea and something that shouldn't be frowned on.

The moral? Calm down. Seriously.

It's a popular opinion so it can't be beyond moronic? "Exact same way as"? They think there's a god who both is so sensitive to jokes like that and worth worshiping? The idea that the powerful should be protected from everything, even jokes, is not just moronic its revolting.

 

[Milanezi]

My favorite episode ever. Probably one of the few times I agreed 100% with Jim, I think single player is very important, I really enjoy the storytelling and you seldom get a good one out of multiplayer experience, even when it's co-op you end up meeting someone, sooner or later, who will just skip the cutscenes, leaving anyone in the party who wanted to go through the game's "lore" quite pissed...

 

[minimacker]

Good watch. Are they making SimCity have some mandatory online crap? I'm looking forward to the new one but I would prefer to play solo myself.

It looks like the best Sim City so far. Where every citizen has some needs, instead of being a statistic. Then they dump this extreme DRM on us. Boom! It's sad, really. It's not the developers' fault, yet they're the ones getting punished.

 

[Metalrocks]

yeah. its amazing why people think a game without MP is bad. i like to play SP only. just being my self. but most of the games today dont let you.

 

[Legion]

I get the point you are making (and agree), but loneliness is really the state of being alone and not wanting to be. It's not the same thing as being alone because you'd prefer it that way.

 

[Jimothy Sterling]

Jim, I loved the intro and outro to this week's episode. It reminded me that you should do a dramatic reading of this piece of art from way back whenever.

Aaww man, I forgot all about this. Dang I miss that lady.

 

[A Curious Fellow]

There is absolutely no problem with having more options in a game. I've enjoyed, greatly, playing multiplayer in Minecraft and Mass Effect 3, for example. I wouldn't play Minecraft if I was FORCED to be alone, and the multiplayer in Mass Effect is incredibly deep and rewarding, nevermind wildly well-supported by the Bioware and EA.

I don't understand why you would talk down at a game developer for wanting to make a more rounded experience for the player.

The problem is that most of the time these extra options take extra resources. Mass Effect 3, while it has a good multiplayer (from what I've heard), is still played for the most part for the single player. Maybe the campaign wouldn't have been so bad, maybe the ending wouldn't have been horrible, maybe they could've put more Role playing elements.
Sure it's nice to have options, but those options shouldn't take away from the core experience, in fact having more options may limit the depth (and thus more options) of the game. In an opposite example, I think CoD should be online only and shouldn't have single-player.

The best games are those that offer a great single player that can be adapted easily into an online mode, like Tetris.

This argument is exhausted and ought to be retired. You can outspend the gdp of a small island nation with the average AAA game development budget. I'd rather have an alternate avenue of enjoyment in a game I just bought for sixty dollars than have only one playtype with one extra coat of polish. And shame on you for calling Mass Effect 3's campaign "bad". It was fifty hours of tightly composed and emotionally investing excellence, and they fixed the ending.

 

[The Lugz]

as an ex wow player, i can completely sympathize with the single-player audience
having to wait for other people so you can play your game is tiresome, and eventually becomes annoying enough to ruin the experience entirely

oh, oh and let's not forget multiplier achievements.
haha... what evil genius concocted this massacre of time?
every time you play your game 'omg, let's do that 3 hour achievement'.... no?

there is peer pressure, you want to try dual wielding shotguns and wearing a hockey mask, when it only lets you do 100 dps and has 3 Armour?

well you're a bad gamer. fact. people tell you so. omg l2p!!!

couldn't be because i want an actual challenge beyond the designed game-play that we know works that I've been forced to do 90 trillion times and so therefore isn't a real challenge could it? no. i'm just bad.

people suck, they have massive ego problems and cannot controls themselves and frankly i believe i am above them
( it's not ironic, it's just sad. )
and they do not deserve my attention at all until they learn to be civil and respectful of other's time
which will never happen, because there's an inevitable flood of new players all the time and honestly
i really don't want to educate people for the rest of my life, or have constant arguments about anything
that isn't completely obvious at first glance

single player is the last bastion of pure game play, and once it dissolves so will my interest in gaming as a whole
fortunately i have bathesda's catalogue of games on steam
saints row
and the ultimate nirvana of personal glory that is minecraft's block laying perfection

i honestly believe i could play those forever if multiplayer-centric company's take over and attempt to force me to play most ( or all ) of a game's content online in multi-player they can kiss my cash goodbye
i'm lookin at you diablo.

 

[Strazdas]

Thanks but no thanks i dont want some stupid persons crime and poluttion spilling into my city just because he does not know how to play it. Singleplayer games are the best, i WANT to be alone playing games. when i want to be with people i start up a MMO, and i paly MMO ONLY for the social aspect, when i want to play for gaming i do gaming, alone.
And yep id rather be a lone loser than play some games with other people. This is a very stupid idea imo and i completely agree with JIM (as is usual).

I do have to say that as an OPTION to play games like GTA4 with other palyers is not bad. but we already have that, its called multiplayer mode.

 

[ExileNZ]

Only The Lonely

The videogame industry wants you to believe that the offline experience is for miserable loners.

Watch Video

I don't usually have much or anything to say about JQ, but Holy Fuck, this!

Fucking. THIS.

I'm surrounded by people in my daily life, be it friends, colleagues or family. Oddly enough, I don't want them tagging along with me when I'm wandering around Rapture. I can even sum up the whole thing in one nice (and real life) analogy:

Way back when, I was playing Clive Barker's Undying for the first time. After a good few hours of wandering around a haunted estate and lonely catacombs, I finally got up to Lizbeth, the vampiric socialite. As the dialogue finished and she unleashed an ungodly howl at me, my mum came in and said "Oh, is this a scarrrry bit?".

Totally fucking ruined the experience.

I've had similar experiences with the wife and I now separate my games into "immersive" and "non-immersive".

When she's around, I'll play simpler, more superficial stuff. 2D platformers. JRPGs. Run-and-gun FPSes.

I've had Bioshock on my shelf for years now and I've yet to find the time to play it. Specifically, the time to play it AWAY FROM FUCKING PEOPLE. Because, like Jim says, I don't want some prick running around and completely ruining my immersion. I get enough of that in my living room.

Horror isn't horror when you're with other people. It's schlock. That's a totally different form of entertainment.

Fuck people.

 

[riftermcriftington]

Journey was a brilliant example of how to create engaging multiplayer in a uniquely singular experience. When I beat it I had no idea that I had Journeyed with eight different people. I suspect the immersion was better achieved because it limits your interaction to one button to signify location or desire for help. If the industry is going to insist on tacking on multiplayer or even designing single player experiences with a multiplayer focus, they need to look at titles like Journey and go back to formula to find a way to make the people you're in the game with actually matter, a goal more often accomplished through limitting or refining the experience rather than leaving us awash with options and tactics we have no need or desire for *ahem* team speak *ahem*

 

[Blachman201_v1legacy]

This recently idiocy with forced mulitiplayer, especially in EA games, can be blamed on President of EA Labels and Empty Suit Extraordinaire, Frank Gibeau, who suffers suffers from some arrogant delusion (and if you think I am making baseless accusations, try looking up some of the stuff that the man has said about games and marketing) that online components is what the costumer want, so it is going to be brutally shoehorned in into any EA game, even if it obviously does not fit in the game in question.

 

[Carnagath]

Isn't the whole point of escapism to immerse yourself in a well-crafted tale, regardless of medium (Book, Film, Videogame)? What does multiplayer have to do with it...

 

[Erttheking]

snip

snip

I really can't wrap my head around the idea that you honestly think that calling 90% of the world's population idiots for not thinking the exact same way as you is a good idea and something that shouldn't be frowned on.

The moral? Calm down. Seriously.

It's a popular opinion so it can't be beyond moronic? "Exact same way as"? They think there's a god who both is so sensitive to jokes like that and worth worshiping? The idea that the powerful should be protected from everything, even jokes, is not just moronic its revolting.

It's a massive sweeping generalization, and since there is no evidence proving them wrong, NO it can't be beyond moronic. And you weren't joking in that post, you were being downright insulting.

 

[Sel Sama]

I like single player games, i also like Multiplayer games when they are done right.

The are some games, like you Jim, that i enjoy, because they are single player games.

I don`t have to deal with some random person who may or may not know what the ____ they are doing. Quite often i found that the people that don`t know what they are doing or should be doing, are the people that don`t know they suck at the game they are playing. When you have to depend on some random A hole to survive, or defeat the challenge, it would be nice if they where competent at the role or task they are suppose to be doing.

There some single player games that suck because the AI that controls your `helpers` suck, in those single player games i wish my friends could take over for the AI, but those games are few and far between, OK there are more of them out there then there should be, but i don`t find my self liking a lot of them enough to play them at all.

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

I would like to point out that some of the best games of all time, like Super Metroid, are single player experiences, and that game in particular rides on the feeling of loneliness for much of it's atmosphere. I think many current developers care so much about just making some extra $$ they don't even account for how multilayer might effect the atmosphere of their game. They just know it's a shiny new thing and it has to be crammed in there.

Quite possibly the most hilarious and ironic thing about all this is that most multilayer games have the shortest longevity. Servers get shut down, the next iteration of halo/CoD come out and the previous one is forgotten and swept under the rug. Oh sure, you can still play Halo 2 and the original CoD games, but... not really. It's not like 'Shadow of The Colossus', which will sit on a pedestal until the end of time. Sony might not even exist as a game company 40 years from now and this game will still be there. You won't need any Sony servers or other people to play it with to get the best and fullest experience it has to offer.

I swear, between turning everything multilayer and trying for an all digital future, the game industry is burning their candle at both ends. It's staggering how naive they must think we are. But part of me is kind of glad that in 20-30 years almost every game coming out now will be unplayable. It will force people to go back and play the classics lol

Tangent: It is disquieting with the DRM servers, software compatibility and non-reverse-compatibility that a lot of games will be impossible to play (legally), be they multi-player or single-player. As kids we promised we'd be playing our favorite games into our old age, but it may be harder than expected to do that.

On Topic: The emphasis on multi-player seems like one of numerous gimmicks being employed to make money rather than a lasting enjoyable experience. DLC is a mixed bag, it seems to me multi-player is nearly its own genre now.

Good point on the best games mention. Even classic games aside, look at this year. What were the top games? Walking Dead, Dishonored, Spec Ops, Mass Effect, (Journey). The multi-player games turn a profit, but I can't think of too many memorable ones.

 

[Kuredan]

So what if found was interesting is that loneliness or more accurate, the desire to be alone is a key characteristic of an introvert. Introverts playing video games? Unheard of! Multiplayer games seem a bit... extroverted don't they? What with the socializing and requiring other people and all.. So it seems to me what was once an introverts hobby has broadened to include something that appeals to an extroverted market. Normally this is a good thing and should have led to more games across a wider market with more crossovers and more communication. The problem was that these extroverted games sold better, perhaps because there are more extroverts than introverts, I sure don't know. So these game companies that were founded by and for introverts but have been profiting from extroverts are faced with a dilemma and one that is pretty easily solved by more money.

Moreover it seems to me that the apologist argument of "We have to tolerate mediocre, mass appealing games because they enable game companies to make the arts games we do like" argument doesn't hold water anymore. More and more companies are coming out to say their aim is to get the most money possible, oops I mean they want to make all games multiplayer. So where are those artsy games the shlock has bought? Oh right, they're being sent to kickstarter because big game companies don't want to take a chance on them anymore. Sigh.

 

[Animyr]

Glad to see that I'm not the only one who remembers how disappointing fear 3 was.

Not that I was opposed to the co-op when they announced it, but then the built and structured the whole damn game around it and made single-player a tack-on. Why?? (Rhetorical question)