Hahahahaha Jesus no want you!~~~~~~
Personally, I DO like multiplayer games... but when I want to play as THE hero, in a game, well... putting it simple, there is ONLY ONE Dante (well... not any more...), ONE Master Chef, ONE doom guy, ONE JESUS. you can't have 1000+ savior of the world, When playing story epic games, I expect it to be single. my friends, can... well... just suck it up and watch me kick ass....
I like this argument. When I want to play multiplayer in a game, it's there. When I want to play single player, that means I want all other potential players to piss off and leave me to my wanderings. I would actually argue that Mass Effect 3, while the system is potentially flawed in that they tied Galactic Readiness to multiplayer (even though it isn't required due to a rebalancing of required Galactic Readiness when they did the Extended Cut of the ending), the multiplayer, while "just a mindless horde mode" is still a fun mode. I have a few online friends and we still get a good time out of Platinum runs (even though I usually either volunteer for or get stuck on Volus duty), but when I don't want to play multiplayer, single player's there to slake my thirst. Or Minecraft, which lets you opt out of online games so you can play single-player. Either way, you get the idea.
I have to agree with this, sometimes I sign out of teamspeak and steam, claiming I have to leave, only to read a book or play a singleplayer game.
I just don't want to talk to people all day.
I'm surprised Jim didn't talk about the obvious reason for the whole multiplayer in simcity, its just an excuse for a really annoying drm scheme. The reason that publishers love multiplayer is because it allows them to retain more control of the product. The new simcity is practically an mmo, it doesnt even store save data locally, being social is only their excuse, kind of like blizzards excuse for diablo 3 "multiplayer is the right way to play this so we dont have an offline single player."
A good point Jim, sometimes doing things on your own is more preferable. Its like reading, nearly everyone reads something at sometime but while many may join book clubs or go to public readings the vast majority of people most of the time will just want to be alone to read their book.
Also if Jesus doesn't want you up there Jim it may be because with you down here he doesn't feel the need to come back himself, as you seem to have everything covered yourself :P
This is why I utterly prefer to play Dark Souls offline, because I don't want other little shits stabbing me on the back while I'm spelunking and being careful in a dungeon.
Seriously, Dark Souls is the Super Metroid of this generation, this game has an incredible atmosphere that even beats some of today's "horror" games, I wouldn't like that ruined by other people running naked trying to kill me, heck, I don't even want to play this game with friends, as tempting as that idea sounds, that would completely ruin my feeling of loneliness and isolation.
As much as I love playing MMO's (The Secret World being my current addiction and it's utterly awesome), sometimes I just want to pop-in a game and start killing some shit, or just playing an RPG all by myself.
When I saw the title I was fully prepared to hear Jim belt out a few Journey ballads. I am disappoint.
If video games went totally multiplayer only, I'd be forced to abandon them forever. I can't add anything more constructive because Jim has said it all perfectly.
Fucking Fear 3 indeed. F3AR...
I'm surprised Silent Hill: Book of memories didn't come up here. A co-op Silent Hill title on a handheld? Then again, Jim rather vehemently defended it before its release because people hated on it simply for being different. I wonder what his views are on it after it's release.
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.
Well said. People lead increasingly busy and hectic lives and the solid single-player experience is an important way of unplugging from the hustle and bustle of professional and social life. Multiplayer as an option is nearly always a nice plus, but when it is the lion's share of the experience then the quality of that experience hinges on the online community. Which is to say that it is blown to holy hell.
Thank You for God, Jim.
Hey, folks, lay off the "hahaha devout people are so stupid" characterizations. Mocking someone for their faith is decidedly uncool - as would it be if they mocked you for your lack of it.
While I don't mind multiplayer I do get tired of people saying games like Dishonored need co-op or multiplayer. They weren't designed to have it and don't need it.
Now you have great games like God of War tagging it on and putting the same crap death matches and same crap capture and hold that we've seen for almost 10 years now.
I do enjoy the single player experience. Growing up with a PS2 and no internet connection to it, single player is always the first mode I try. Even in the multiplayer focused games. However, me owning a game boils down to how often I can replay it, and in that regard multiplayer has the advantage over single. Multiplayer enjoys a truly unique experience for being completely different every time and the most challenging. No matter how good your AI is, it can never really compare to the tactical genius of a person. While humans are also easily susceptible to predictable patterns of behavior, it's far more prevalent in AI foes, and you're more likely to discover variations and anomalies outside the statistical norm. Thus, I tend to own multiplayer games (or games with extensive amounts of content) and simply rent or buy when they're cheaper single player games.
Anyone else reminded of Garth Meregnhi when they see Jim up on his podium? I mean, I've always had the sneaking suspicion that Jim might've been influenced (at least appearance-wise) by Matthew Holness, but this little deliberation about God sort of clinched it for me. And what Jim, no John Lennon call out?
So, if things I do by myself are bad, tell me how reading is good for me, because I can't think how reading a book can be done with more people than just myself.
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.
I'm one of the people Jim described. My job requires me to deal with a lot of people and being social in general, day after day. I play singleplayer only games to get away from that. Or sometimes I just want to play the game my way, without having to think about others. I've been doing that all day, now I want my 'me'-time. I want to shut up and enjoy some peace and quiet while I subjugate virtual empires or something like that.
So yeah, thank god for you, Jim.
Well that heart attack line nearly made me spew lemonade over my computer. Considering I hated the first few shows, you've pulled a god damn u-turn and struck a fine balance between actually thought provoking commentary (ironically without sounding self righteous) while still adding enough humour (without it turning into a damn gag reel).
But I disagree, with the Fallout bit anyway, optional AND I STRESS, OPTIONAL, SUPER OPTIONAL multiplayer could have been kinda fun, romping in the wasteland with a buddy.
Multiplayer has a time and a place, especially if the game is built up around it and actually enjoyable. But yeah, the concept that single player gaming is dead is absolutely foolish to say the least. I love my single player games. Besides, considering you can load everything up through Steam and such, you can be playing a single player game and still interact with people socially via one conversation or another. They don't have to be tagging along with you in meaningless tacked-on co-op just because.
As for the accusations of Blasphemy... I think the bible thumpers should realize that not everyone in the world shares their particular delusions, and most of us in the civilized world do not live in countries governed by their particular brand of church. So yes, fuck 'em. :)
Most of the fun I have had in video games has been in single player titles: The Fallouts, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate series, Far Cry III's single player, Bioshock's Single Player, The Deus Exes (not 2), The Civilization Series, Alpha Centari, Crusader Kings II, Europa Universalis series, Total War series, Mass Effect series, Amnesia, Bard's Tale, Batman: Arkham City/Asylum, Dragon Age, Elder Scrolls Series, Galactic Civilizations series, Grand Theft Auto series, Jade Empire, Just Cause 2, L.A. Noire, Spec Ops: The Line, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series and The Walking Dead... not a single one of those games was played using its multiplayer or if it was the experience felt tacked on or was non-condusive to play (apart from Grand Theft Auto but that was mostly a chaos simulator).
On the flip side, games that I really enjoy the multiplayer of are Team Fortress 2, Natural Selection 2, World of Warcraft (for awhile), Guild Wars 2 and Planetside 2. Games DESIGNED around Multiplayer first and foremost.
See a frigging trend? The games designed around multiplayer have the best multiplayer, those that devote at least 90% of their resources to single player have great single player.
At the same time I do like the idea of co-op in Dead Space 3... I think they really can do something with it. Making one of the characters freak out suddenly and perceive their team mate as a hostile -while cutting off voice communication- could make for some frantic situations. Suddenly your sane team mate needs to subdue you as you attempt to shoot him, every time he dodges your attacks the monster he appears as dies and a new one busts out of the ground where he rolled to. The trick will be to make it impossible to tell if it really is a fight or if your character is having a freak out.
WTF kind of fish is that? It's like a hammerhead shark, but with bad teeth and a dick for a nose.
On topic, multiplayer can be a giant f'ing immersion breaker if I'm playing a game for the story. Take Guild Wars 2 - I rarely ever dungeon crawl in that game because if I did, I might want to watch the little story bits while everyone else stands around and waits for me. I'd much rather just be saving this or that town from giants, skritt, or centaurs, getting my Hero on, without getting in the way of somebody else who wants to move shit along. I play single player games to get away from people, multiplayer when I want interaction. They're separate playstyles and should remain as such.
As an atheist, I thank Darwin for me. Although at this stage of human history, with medical and scientific advancements, evolution has kinda fallen to the wayside. Perhaps I should thank Tesela, or Jobs.
First thing that came to mind when reading the title.
Resident Evil 5. We can all agree how that Horror game was made better by being turned into an Action game by adding a coop partner.
Whats up with the fish at 1:47 ? anyway as far as the developers don't make it necesary to co op im okay, i love dark souls but i ussually play it offline, but my brother seems to think its awesome play it just bothers me , i want to play the game alone.
Obviously I agree with this, and the sales numbers of Dishonored, Skyrim, and The Walking Dead back this up. Of more importance is that I may need to revisit my sexual orientation due to man Bayonetta still being rather sexy. Of ever more importance than that is my conviction that Jim is not dead only because God is afraid of all the Ragnarok business. What a good day.
There's a quote attributed to Giovanni Gravina: "A bore is a man who deprives you of solitude without providing you with company." The steps made by companies like EA and Blizzard to foist multiplayer and social elements onto us ignore the question of whether solitude is what we desire, or whether our experiences will necessarily be improved by the presence- to whatever degree- of other players within our play-space.
In some ways what I find even more offensive, though, is that I feel the pressure to put multiplayer into games that would have gone without it in the past is built upon a lie. I truly don't believe that this desire to force us to share all our game-playing experiences is something that has risen out of an unquenchable customer demand. Rather, multi-player is frequently a way to add "value" to a game with a minimal investment in content. If you actually have to build more maps and skin more characters and write more dialogue and render more cut-scenes, that's a much bigger investment of time and energy that every "single" player will churn through more or less simultaneously from the time they start playing the game. By contrast, if you make a smaller investment in multiplayer, you add apparent value while all those "single" players entertain each other for hours on end without you having to make further contributions. It's like sending the older children to take care of the younger ones.
What's similarly perverse is that, even as many of these big companies push these "go keep your siblings occupied" measures, they seem to be more and more willing to crack down on mods and fan-led efforts that used to be a similar source of genuine fan desire to expand the experience for their fellow players. We want you to babysit, but in our house, by our rules, no heading off the reservation.
I agree with Jim there is a lace for multi-player,co-op and single player games. Its up to me to decide if I want bring social aspects into the game or not. I don't like it when game developers force upon you.
I agree with you on almost all points Jim, but it makes sense that these big gaming corporations want to discourage solo alone play. This is because they can sell more copies of a game if you want to get it so you can play with your friend who also probably owns the game. It is in the best interest to try to sell the game to as many people as possible and the added "replay value" from having a tacked on multiplayer so you can keep playing with your friends makes them sell the game more and possibly sequels of that game since you still want to play the new one with your friends
You can try to justify your horrible always online DRM all you want Maxis. I still won't buy the game though (and by the way, insulting those of us who already don't want to buy the game? not a brilliant tactic).
But yeah, I completely agree with with this episode. I LIKE my single player alone time. If I want to play with other people, there are games for that, and if I want to play alone, there are games for that too. But not if the out of touch publishers have their way. They don't even do it right; why must we play with other people but ONLY other people not in the same room? What the fuck happened to playing with other people in the same room? If Killzone 3 can make local co-op work, so can everyone else. You other guys are basically the opposite of Nintendo: they need to learn what online multiplayer is, and you need to learn what local multiplayer is again.
I'm also sick of having to miss content in older games because there's co-op only levels that you can't play unless you get somebody to play with you, but the game is old and nobody wants to play it anymore. At least put in a goddamn AI partner so we can still experience the content you twats.
Of more importance is that I may need to revisit my sexual orientation due to man Bayonetta still being rather sexy.
Not really. That's not simply "man Bayonetta", that's Willem Dafoe Bayonetta.
I honestly just have to say thanks for making this Jim.
I probably have what's called Schizoid Personality Disorder, which is commonly defined as a lack of interest in social relationships. Honestly, just being in the same room or in visual sight of other human beings can wear on me, I don't even had to be talking to them. I am commonly not able to be as alone as I would wish, as social contact is required for living. So, gaming is the best escape for me.
My favourite game of all time is Metroid Prime, a game about being alone in a hostile world and conquering the dangers it contains. As you can probably tell, this is a game that really speaks to me. My favourite genre is stealth, where being alone and not noticed by anyone is in fact, a good thing.
So, the games industry commonly forcing multiplayer into games under the excuse that loneliness is bad really gets to me. I like being alone, it's calming. It's even a form of release for me, when being around people all day can build up a lot of tension.
Again, thanks Jim.
Jim my friend, as awesome as you are, I can't help but think you will suffer the same fate as the late George Carlin. Any how, back on topic, yea I too enjoy playing single player games for the social deprivation.
Dying at the age of 71?
Some of the best games out there are single player games. I play games with my friends so often that I like to boot up a game to play by myself now and again. Every single time I log into Xbox Live I'm assailed with invites for Halo, Mass Effect, or Borderlands, and sometimes I just want to be left alone to play Hitman or something. I like an offline experience. I can take it at my pace and enjoy my game the way I want to without the judgement or time-constraints of another individual.
An awkward example of this is Star Wars: The Old Republic. It's an MMO, so there are lots of people running around, especially now that it's free to play. However, you can solo the entire storyline of your class if you so choose, and I damn well do choose to at times. I have characters that I play with friends and then characters that are just for me. I don't even go looking for random groups to do certain quests. I enjoy playing by myself, but I also like the feeling that I am a part of a larger world, and the people are there in case I get a hair up my ass and decide to invite one of them to briefly join me for a quest that requires more participants.
I'm glad this came up, actually. Just the other day I was playing SW:TOR and I had a guy bugging the shit out of me for soloing and not playing with other people, who then spent the next half-hour explaining to me that I needed to get into the end game or I was just wasting my time, despite that fact that I was having fun as it is. I fucking hate it when people try to tell me how to have fun in a game; it's their way and I respect that to the extent that being pleasant requires, but that doesn't mean that it should be everyone's way. It's something that's irritating particularly in video games. You play Call of Duty, but you don't... play the multiplayer?! You're crazy! The multiplayer is the best part! Play it! Play with other people! You don't know what you're missing out on!!
I do, as it happens, know what I'm missing out on. I have my co-op games that I won't play without my friends and I have games that I enjoy simply to be by myself. It's nice to get away from it all. People read books for the same reason and you don't see other people running up to them and shouting "what are you doing?! Stop reading by yourself and come read with us!!"
I think this is pretty much the longest 'I agree, Jim' post I've ever made.
Social Sim City can be dangerous.
I used to play Multiplayer Minecraft and I used to get so very angry if anyone touched my stuff. I am really defensive of my projects. In fact I scrapped a project in Minecraft because a friend thought it'd be nice of him to help me without my knowledge. It made me see my project as not mine anymore.
I play Roller Coaster Tycoon 3. I enjoy the solitary and the fact I can focus on a project for me.
However I do share what I do on a internet community forum because as much as I like my work to be far away from grubby little mits of other human beings, I also enjoy showing off, with screenshots or videos. Perhaps an idea for solo-games is being able to 'document' your character's progress in the game with ease. Bioware... sort of did this with Dragon Age but it was kinda pointless since everyone's story was "the same". With The Elderscrolls you have scope of making an easy-to-access optional online "water-cooler"/scrapbook thing.
Some games just are meant be a solo experience. I mean just the idea of playing Sim city and having someone else randomly coming into my game world and start making stuff and wasting money that I have to undo just sounds like something that would piss me off. Xcom is a game that would be hindered with other people playing messing up your carefully planned tactics.Infamous would be annoying if it were mutliplayer and people would vetto the route of the game you were playing or whine because they've seen the cutscenes before and don't care to wait for you to experience for yourself for the first time. Would you enjoy the arkham games with Batman if some guy kept getting spot and alerting guard everytime you were about to sneak up on a thug. Basically people coming in and kicking over your virtual block towers because they can is lame, regardless if it's thru being bad or mean.
You can't allow a game with lasting consequences to progess or the game world be multiplayer or you basically are setting yourself up for grieving. Some games the camera angles just can't keep up with two or more people very well and you're basically playing as a group of individuals not a team then. They have to water down the gameplay experience so teaming up has a point. Basically video game heroes have Ninja physics...the more of them there are the less powerful they become. Sometimes it's fun being the .."Last Justice" standing against whatever threat alone, but having all toys to do so.
Ultimately there's games that shine and prosper for having multiplayer. Borderlands 1 and 2 are perfect examples for that. (which I think Yahtzee's problem with them is the fact he doesnt play those games with friends.)Super mario wii and Smash bros are great games for a team of people to play together. There's plenty of games that are definitely better for having multiplayer in them. In the end I think developers need to flexible to whatever is the best choice for the type of game you're tying to make.
i feel it important to say that i compleatley agree with everything youve said, and have been waiting for someone to say it like that.
"Fucking Fear 3!" and Chungus_St_McChungus made this episode relly enjoyable for me. :D
It's the first time I'm commenting to any of your vids, just wanted to let you know that I think your very funny(though you probably won't read this)!
By the way I started playing video games without being socially deprived and now I am ;__;
I am a lonely person using video games for escapism, and even though I'm lonely multiplayer games don't actually manage to make me feel less lonely. And why is that? Because in multiplayer games you may work together with other persons and communicate to a certain degree but in the end you just do so in order to archieve an objective e.g raid a dungeon, win the map etc. In most cases that's as deep as the relationship with other people get in games. Maybe not if you join a clan or guild and play often with the same people though I doubt whether they can be defined as "friends".
My hypothesis: the sort of push for multi-player that Jim is describing is to set the stage for the eventual sell of "community" or "connectivity" services that integrate with games to gamers, either as a subscription service or a la carte service. Basically, just about anything a company does is a calculated maneuver to increase sales or revenue.