Do you roleplay?
Yeah, I love making my own story.
60.7% (227)
60.7% (227)
I do, but not so much in games.
11.8% (44)
11.8% (44)
Eh, I guess.
9.6% (36)
9.6% (36)
Not really, doesn't seem too fun to me.
9.9% (37)
9.9% (37)
Hell no, that shit's weird.
4.5% (17)
4.5% (17)
Other.
2.4% (9)
2.4% (9)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Hatred Towards Roleplaying

 Pages PREV 1 2 3
 

Owyn_Merrilin:

Whoah, cool, thanks for the link to Aurora; that sounds awesome. As for SEV/SEIV, just so you know, the original developer went out of business, so an updated version that fixes the Windows 7 bugs is unlikely, barring a fan patch.

Where did you hear that? Malfador is still around, as is his publisher.

evilneko:

Owyn_Merrilin:

Whoah, cool, thanks for the link to Aurora; that sounds awesome. As for SEV/SEIV, just so you know, the original developer went out of business, so an updated version that fixes the Windows 7 bugs is unlikely, barring a fan patch.

Where did you hear that? Malfador is still around, as is his publisher.

Well that's good news. I can't remember the exact site, but it was one of the things I saw mentioned when I was looking for information on how to get the game running.

I roleplay on a text-based system pretty extensively. As such, I've never met these obsessive LARP types who can shift into character well outside of their NERO chapter's locations and time slots. I do know a few LARPers, but I can't say I've ever jumped in.

I would've liked to, but being disabled, running around in a private forested area is kind of off-limits. I'd probably end up doing most of my roleplaying from a camp cot and a pressure bandage on a swollen ankle. :)

Not knowing many Mind's Eye Theater types either, I've never had the opportunity to try that out in a more controlled environment, like a café or a warehouse.

I like role playing. I do in any game I play. I am a dice jokey. What I have found out in my experience is that most people enjoy role playing, but it is the people that are bad but strongly opinionated that ruin it and creep people out. I have a strong dislike for the people who try to speak like there are in the middle ages. Most of them don't know anything about the language at the time and it just comes off as wrong. Add the fact of how serious they are at being wrong and the creep vibe washes over you making you feel like you should go kick a puppy to feel less creepy.

dyre:

Owyn_Merrilin:

dyre:
I thought I enjoyed "roleplaying" until I started playing D&D and played with some more hardcore roleplayers who really get into their characters. I mean, I like making a character who is a certain alignment and has certain moral beliefs, and making choices in-game based on those beliefs, but I can't get into talking like my character would all the time. Some of my friends have even gotten so into their characters that in-game conflicts led to irl "I can't play with you anymore" stuff.

I guess the best way I could put it is that I like to play roleplaying games (both tabletop and computer) with the attitude "I'm playing as this guy," not "I am this guy," you know?

I still like video game roleplaying though. That's fun.

Those are the ones I'm referring to when I say they'd be better off doing community theater. You don't have to spend much time around people like that for it to sour you on the whole experience XD

Lol yeah, I'm staying away from that sort of roleplaying for the rest of my life, I think. Thankfully, the hardcore roleplayers eventually left our D&D group, and now the rest of us are just content playing D&D like a video game (DM tells a cool story; we follow along and make occasional important choices in that story, as well as the usual breaking into castles and killing monsters and that sort of stuff).

I never understood this "community theater" attitude. A good GM always states what kind of game hes looking players for. As in, how much roleplay and how much combat you should expect. I myself find "roll players" who minmax their character and metagame the whole session, planning how to get most gold and exp annoying too. But I don't think they should "stick to videogames" or something like that. They just need to find a group with like minded players.

Although being too much into roleplaying might not be your problem here. A player who gets whiny over your ingame decicions and quits the game isnt roleplaying, hes being a fucking douche. For example, if I somehow played a Lawful good paladin in a group of evil characters, my character would be pissed. He would either leave or try to kill some of them, but I would roll a new character afterwards, not quit or get mad at the group! (probably I'd be a little mad to the GM, if he didnt warn me about my character totally not fitting into the group)

A Weakgeek:

dyre:

Owyn_Merrilin:

Those are the ones I'm referring to when I say they'd be better off doing community theater. You don't have to spend much time around people like that for it to sour you on the whole experience XD

Lol yeah, I'm staying away from that sort of roleplaying for the rest of my life, I think. Thankfully, the hardcore roleplayers eventually left our D&D group, and now the rest of us are just content playing D&D like a video game (DM tells a cool story; we follow along and make occasional important choices in that story, as well as the usual breaking into castles and killing monsters and that sort of stuff).

I never understood this "community theater" attitude. A good GM always states what kind of game hes looking players for. As in, how much roleplay and how much combat you should expect. I myself find "roll players" who minmax their character and metagame the whole session, planning how to get most gold and exp annoying too. But I don't think they should "stick to videogames" or something like that. They just need to find a group with like minded players.

Although being too much into roleplaying might not be your problem here. A player who gets whiny over your ingame decicions and quits the game isnt roleplaying, hes being a fucking douche. For example, if I somehow played a Lawful good paladin in a group of evil characters, my character would be pissed. He would either leave or try to kill some of them, but I would roll a new character afterwards, not quit or get mad at the group! (probably I'd be a little mad to the GM, if he didnt warn me about my character totally not fitting into the group)

I don't think any of us "roll players" were the type who minmax and metagame all the time; that seems pretty boring. We certainly did make choices based on our characters' personalities rather than "how do I get the best gear;" that level of roleplaying is great and fun and all that. But a few people wanted to talk in-character all the time, or they'd insist on abandoning a quest or w/e because "that's what their characters would've done," even though we all knew the DM put a lot of work into that quest and the rest of us were willing to go with the flow so the DM could tell his story (within reason, obviously). And they'd let their in-character disagreements spill into real life tensions, which just annoyed the whole group. It was just a bunch of needless drama.

We were all new to D&D at the time, and I don't think our DM was aware at the start that there would be two conflicting types of roleplayers / roll-players.

dyre:

A Weakgeek:

dyre:

Lol yeah, I'm staying away from that sort of roleplaying for the rest of my life, I think. Thankfully, the hardcore roleplayers eventually left our D&D group, and now the rest of us are just content playing D&D like a video game (DM tells a cool story; we follow along and make occasional important choices in that story, as well as the usual breaking into castles and killing monsters and that sort of stuff).

I never understood this "community theater" attitude. A good GM always states what kind of game hes looking players for. As in, how much roleplay and how much combat you should expect. I myself find "roll players" who minmax their character and metagame the whole session, planning how to get most gold and exp annoying too. But I don't think they should "stick to videogames" or something like that. They just need to find a group with like minded players.

Although being too much into roleplaying might not be your problem here. A player who gets whiny over your ingame decicions and quits the game isnt roleplaying, hes being a fucking douche. For example, if I somehow played a Lawful good paladin in a group of evil characters, my character would be pissed. He would either leave or try to kill some of them, but I would roll a new character afterwards, not quit or get mad at the group! (probably I'd be a little mad to the GM, if he didnt warn me about my character totally not fitting into the group)

I don't think any of us "roll players" were the type who minmax and metagame all the time; that seems pretty boring. We certainly did make choices based on our characters' personalities rather than "how do I get the best gear;" that level of roleplaying is great and fun and all that. But a few people wanted to talk in-character all the time, or they'd insist on abandoning a quest or w/e because "that's what their characters would've done," even though we all knew the DM put a lot of work into that quest and the rest of us were willing to go with the flow so the DM could tell his story (within reason, obviously). And they'd let their in-character disagreements spill into real life tensions, which just annoyed the whole group. It was just a bunch of needless drama.

We were all new to D&D at the time, and I don't think our DM was aware at the start that there would be two conflicting types of roleplayers / roll-players.

Firstly, I'd like to apoligize if it seemed like was saying that all "roll players" are like that. Thats only the polar opposite to your "hardcore roleplayers". Also, again, I don't feel like being an ass because of in-character disagreements counts as roleplaying. Those are the same type of people who get worked up over factions in WoW or kill/death ratios in FPSs, in other words: Idiots.

As for the abandoning quest thing, im a bit on fence about that. I ofcourse think that the most important thing is to keep the game going and have fun, especially at the start. But if the GM keeps getting the group into these types of situations, after having plenty of time to get to know the characters, Well thats just bad GMing. Unless the guy has written the whole game into stone from the start, and is railroading like hell, in which case, fuck the game anyways.

A Weakgeek:

dyre:

A Weakgeek:

I never understood this "community theater" attitude. A good GM always states what kind of game hes looking players for. As in, how much roleplay and how much combat you should expect. I myself find "roll players" who minmax their character and metagame the whole session, planning how to get most gold and exp annoying too. But I don't think they should "stick to videogames" or something like that. They just need to find a group with like minded players.

Although being too much into roleplaying might not be your problem here. A player who gets whiny over your ingame decicions and quits the game isnt roleplaying, hes being a fucking douche. For example, if I somehow played a Lawful good paladin in a group of evil characters, my character would be pissed. He would either leave or try to kill some of them, but I would roll a new character afterwards, not quit or get mad at the group! (probably I'd be a little mad to the GM, if he didnt warn me about my character totally not fitting into the group)

I don't think any of us "roll players" were the type who minmax and metagame all the time; that seems pretty boring. We certainly did make choices based on our characters' personalities rather than "how do I get the best gear;" that level of roleplaying is great and fun and all that. But a few people wanted to talk in-character all the time, or they'd insist on abandoning a quest or w/e because "that's what their characters would've done," even though we all knew the DM put a lot of work into that quest and the rest of us were willing to go with the flow so the DM could tell his story (within reason, obviously). And they'd let their in-character disagreements spill into real life tensions, which just annoyed the whole group. It was just a bunch of needless drama.

We were all new to D&D at the time, and I don't think our DM was aware at the start that there would be two conflicting types of roleplayers / roll-players.

Firstly, I'd like to apoligize if it seemed like was saying that all "roll players" are like that. Thats only the polar opposite to your "hardcore roleplayers". Also, again, I don't feel like being an ass because of in-character disagreements counts as roleplaying. Those are the same type of people who get worked up over factions in WoW or kill/death ratios in FPSs, in other words: Idiots.

As for the abandoning quest thing, im a bit on fence about that. I ofcourse think that the most important thing is to keep the game going and have fun, especially at the start. But if the GM keeps getting the group into these types of situations, after having plenty of time to get to know the characters, Well thats just bad GMing. Unless the guy has written the whole game into stone from the start, and is railroading like hell, in which case, fuck the game anyways.

It was just at the start of the game. We couldn't even get the game started because the hardcore roleplayers wouldn't agree to participating in the "prologue" quest :|

I'm sure not all roleplayers are like that, of course. There's probably a good balance to be struck somewhere between character freedom, storytelling integrity, and most importantly, fun. I just personally have a bad experience with serious roleplaying :P

Jitters Caffeine:
I actually play quite a bit of tabletop games and D&D, so it comes with the territory. But the only videogame I can get into enough to want to play a character is the Fallout series, specifically New Vegas.

Because New Vegas is made by Obsidian so it actually supports your roleplaying and has different options/skill checks for different character types. Games like Fallout (low int) and Arcanum even have different dialog for different character types.

When your 'roleplaying' in Beth's games http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Roleplaying and making shit up in your head that the game doesn't support or recognize, your actually LARPing, not roleplaying.

Sure...been playing tabletop RPG's for over 30 years, after all, so I got used to 'getting into' whatever character I was playing. As for video games, did/do that all the time in Morrowind, Oblivion, and Skyrim.

dyre:

A Weakgeek:

dyre:

It was just at the start of the game. We couldn't even get the game started because the hardcore roleplayers wouldn't agree to participating in the "prologue" quest :|

I'm sure not all roleplayers are like that, of course. There's probably a good balance to be struck somewhere between character freedom, storytelling integrity, and most importantly, fun. I just personally have a bad experience with serious roleplaying :P

Yeah, that is a difficult situation. Unless every player writes a 3 page backstory and submits that thing a week before to the GM, its impossible to make a prologue quest that sits perfectly with everyone. That is when the players should "go with the flow". The GM probably should try to make the proloque quest pretty neutral, so it goes as smootly as possible.

Its ok to have preferences of course and I wouldn't probably be very positive towards "serious roleplayers" if I met that kind of douches either.

i made some attempts while playing skyrim but only at a basic level(establish a personalty, morals, basic motivation). i can't see my self going beyond that

example
my second character who was a mage(mainly focusing on destruction and conjuration) in the dark brotherhood that would not join the thieves guild. yet still steals things on rare occasions if there is a justifiable reason too not just for the sake of it.

The reason why I generally disslike RPGs is because I simply do not have enough time for them, plus I'm more of a social player. I couldn't even finish Deus Ex Human Revolution. And as a result of that, when I picture the kind if player who would actually have enough time on his hands to enjoy an RPG, with all the lonesome hours of singleplayer that would mean, a certain stereotype inevitably pops up in my mind.

This is not to say that I'm right to think so. I'm just saying that I can certainly see why all this prejudgment against RPG-fans exists.

Anthraxus:

Jitters Caffeine:
I actually play quite a bit of tabletop games and D&D, so it comes with the territory. But the only videogame I can get into enough to want to play a character is the Fallout series, specifically New Vegas.

Because New Vegas is made by Obsidian so it actually supports your roleplaying and has different options/skill checks for different character types.

Fallout 3 always uses the same skill check? News to me.

When your 'roleplaying' in Beth's games http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Roleplaying and making shit up in your head that the game doesn't support or recognize, your actually LARPing, not roleplaying.

This is a silly and inaccurate statement.

Anthraxus:

Jitters Caffeine:
I actually play quite a bit of tabletop games and D&D, so it comes with the territory. But the only videogame I can get into enough to want to play a character is the Fallout series, specifically New Vegas.

Because New Vegas is made by Obsidian so it actually supports your roleplaying and has different options/skill checks for different character types. Games like Fallout (low int) and Arcanum even have different dialog for different character types.

When your 'roleplaying' in Beth's games http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Roleplaying and making shit up in your head that the game doesn't support or recognize, your actually LARPing, not roleplaying.

The TES series just fights me. I can't get into it at all. It's just so shallow and boring when you realize the whole draw is just the exploration, which is already lackluster when all you have is medieval country side.

Jitters Caffeine:

Anthraxus:

Jitters Caffeine:
I actually play quite a bit of tabletop games and D&D, so it comes with the territory. But the only videogame I can get into enough to want to play a character is the Fallout series, specifically New Vegas.

Because New Vegas is made by Obsidian so it actually supports your roleplaying and has different options/skill checks for different character types. Games like Fallout (low int) and Arcanum even have different dialog for different character types.

When your 'roleplaying' in Beth's games http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Roleplaying and making shit up in your head that the game doesn't support or recognize, your actually LARPing, not roleplaying.

The TES series just fights me. I can't get into it at all. It's just so shallow and boring when you realize the whole draw is just the exploration, which is already lackluster when all you have is medieval country side.

I said it before and I'll say it again, if the combat wasn't so terrible the exploration would be more rewarding and exciting and that would make up for the lacking rpg elements. At least it would be a decent actiuon/adventure game. But Bethesda..they never learn.

The age old saying goes...Try and to appeal to everybody, you will just end up mediocrity.

I love role-playing in video games, and with the right people it's fun to do the table top stuff. I don't take it super serious though, I just do it for fun. I think I like it because it's another outlet in which I can be creative.

Anthraxus:

Jitters Caffeine:

Anthraxus:
Because New Vegas is made by Obsidian so it actually supports your roleplaying and has different options/skill checks for different character types. Games like Fallout (low int) and Arcanum even have different dialog for different character types.

When your 'roleplaying' in Beth's games http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Oblivion:Roleplaying and making shit up in your head that the game doesn't support or recognize, your actually LARPing, not roleplaying.

The TES series just fights me. I can't get into it at all. It's just so shallow and boring when you realize the whole draw is just the exploration, which is already lackluster when all you have is medieval country side.

I said it before and I'll say it again, if the combat wasn't so terrible the exploration would be more rewarding and exciting and that would make up for the lacking rpg elements. At least it would be a decent actiuon/adventure game. But Bethesda..they never learn.

The age old saying goes...Try and to appeal to everybody, you will just end up mediocrity.

I think we just stumbled onto a huge conspiracy here. Skyrim to me feels like the Dev team was told to just make a huge, pretty world and that they would go back and fill in all the "game" parts later. But then they ran out of time and just said "SHIT, FILL IT WITH FETCH QUESTS AND EXTERMINATION QUESTS!!". That or they shot for the ever coveted "DUDEBRO" demographic by touting all the dragons. Every character is uninteresting and boring, the quests are rarely ever more than just "go here and bring 'item' back" or "go here and kill everything", and the factions all behave exactly the same and the overlap in dialogue makes me forget who I'm actually helping in a quests.

Jitters Caffeine:

Anthraxus:

Jitters Caffeine:

The TES series just fights me. I can't get into it at all. It's just so shallow and boring when you realize the whole draw is just the exploration, which is already lackluster when all you have is medieval country side.

I said it before and I'll say it again, if the combat wasn't so terrible the exploration would be more rewarding and exciting and that would make up for the lacking rpg elements. At least it would be a decent actiuon/adventure game. But Bethesda..they never learn.

The age old saying goes...Try and to appeal to everybody, you will just end up mediocrity.

I think we just stumbled onto a huge conspiracy here. Skyrim to me feels like the Dev team was told to just make a huge, pretty world and that they would go back and fill in all the "game" parts later. But then they ran out of time and just said "SHIT, FILL IT WITH FETCH QUESTS AND EXTERMINATION QUESTS!!". That or they shot for the ever coveted "DUDEBRO" demographic by touting all the dragons. Every character is uninteresting and boring, the quests are rarely ever more than just "go here and bring 'item' back" or "go here and kill everything", and the factions all behave exactly the same and the overlap in dialogue makes me forget who I'm actually helping in a quests.

They already started going after the "DUDEBRO" demographic with Oblivion and it's AWESOME ACTION 1ST PERSON COMBAT. It's like the COD of RPGs.

Granted, Morrowinds combat was shit, but they didn't need to go the button mashing route either.

And now they'll charge ppl per month or whatever to play it online, when these games are like single player MMOs anyway. Brilliant.

I don't roleplay in games and stuff, but I think it's cool. I find it enjoyable to be in the company of a roleplayer.

...But, umm... one exception. I'm not cool with a dude roleplaying as a girl flirting with me. It requires me to use my brain three times harder than usual.

"Eyes see hot pixilated girl. Eyes like it."

"Heart feels like hot pixilated girl is flirting with me, and defense drops."

"Brain is aware of what's really going on, and quickly and repeatedly sends warning: "IT'S A DUDE. IT'S A DUDE."

"Whole body feels disorientated. Recognizes messages brain is sending, and forces body to ignore eyes and heart."

It is really an uncomfortable feeling.

I'm a huge fan of roleplaying in MMOs and the like. I really don't see the point of roleplaying in games like Skyrim, though, beyond saying "I'm going to stick to magic in this playthrough." It's just one of those things that seems best with other people.

Anthraxus:

I think we just stumbled onto a huge conspiracy here. Skyrim to me feels like the Dev team was told to just make a huge, pretty world and that they would go back and fill in all the "game" parts later. But then they ran out of time and just said "SHIT, FILL IT WITH FETCH QUESTS AND EXTERMINATION QUESTS!!". That or they shot for the ever coveted "DUDEBRO" demographic by touting all the dragons. Every character is uninteresting and boring, the quests are rarely ever more than just "go here and bring 'item' back" or "go here and kill everything", and the factions all behave exactly the same and the overlap in dialogue makes me forget who I'm actually helping in a quests.

Dudebros are into dragons now?

But ehhh...I agree with you and Anthraxus on Skyrim. Plus there's the other big problem: too many Draugr and bandits. Way too many. The Dwarven ruins, Frostflow Lighthouse, Blackreach are cool though.

DustyDrB:

Anthraxus:

I think we just stumbled onto a huge conspiracy here. Skyrim to me feels like the Dev team was told to just make a huge, pretty world and that they would go back and fill in all the "game" parts later. But then they ran out of time and just said "SHIT, FILL IT WITH FETCH QUESTS AND EXTERMINATION QUESTS!!". That or they shot for the ever coveted "DUDEBRO" demographic by touting all the dragons. Every character is uninteresting and boring, the quests are rarely ever more than just "go here and bring 'item' back" or "go here and kill everything", and the factions all behave exactly the same and the overlap in dialogue makes me forget who I'm actually helping in a quests.

Dudebros are into dragons now?

But ehhh...I agree with you and Anthraxus on Skyrim. Plus there's the other big problem: too many Draugr and bandits. Way too many. The Dwarven ruins, Frostflow Lighthouse, Blackreach are cool though.

That was Jitters you quoted there, btw.

And you have to admit, dragons, while they are cool, have been so overdone when it comes to fantasy, that they even transcend into other demographics. I have a friend that mainly played COD and FPS type games and when I told him I was playing DAO, ALL he kept asking me about was dragons this and dragons that. I'm sure alot of them don't have any interest in them, but dragons are pretty damn popular man. Although the ability to shoot stuff through a first person view also is very appealing to them, I've been told. Don't underestimate the Todddler and Beth's mindframe when it comes to selling product.

Anthraxus:
That was Jitters you quoted there, btw.

And you have to admit, dragons, while they are cool, have been so overdone when it comes to fantasy, that they even transcend into other demographics. I have a friend that mainly played COD and FPS type games and when I told him I was playing DAO, ALL he kept asking me about was dragons this and dragons that. I'm sure alot of them don't have any interest in them, but dragons are pretty damn popular man. Although the ability to shoot stuff through a first person view also is very appealing to them, I've been told. Don't underestimate the Todddler and Beth's mindframe when it comes to selling product.

That's the second quote in a row I messed up. And I haven't even been drinking.

I was just trying to imagine some of my dudebro-ish friends going bananas over dragons. It was a funny mental image, but it'd never happen. Maybe there are a few. We should put them on film. The game can just get so god damn boring, though, it's hard for me to believe it really taps that much into the Call of Duty audience. That's not meant to be a putdown to that particular franchise. I've never even played one, but they seem to be all about big moments after big moments and fast-paced action.

I love roleplaying, the keeps the relationship alive and inter... OH you mean video games.

Yes I enjoy it, its why I like MMOs such as Old Republic. Online video games in general though allow you to be a true part of something. Which helps you roleplay. Even though I love Mass Effect, and Mass Effect did a excellent job sucking me into the story no one will speak of my conquest nor my character. Online however, I have had Alklazaris rein supreme and be admire not just within my guild, but within the server itself. He becomes larger than the one controlling him.

That just can't be duplicated.

Other voter here;

I found D&D online the dissapointment I figured it would be from the outset. D&D is a very sensative intellectual property to work with given what it's table top players expect from an experience. Right now my party's rolling around with a Champion of Odin - Paladin, modest level etc... etc... Guy's got a huge charisma, a noble heart and all the brain power of a fart in the wind. When the party needs to do things, and doesn't want to have a cavalier with a giant hammer come ridding in screaming: "For Justice!" we have him guard thatch hut rooves for demons. Seriously, thick. Find that outside of table top!

As for RPG games, I'm a fan of games like Skyrim right now. I've got Baldur's Gate 2 installed right now - great game by the way - and I've always enjoyed old 8bit monster slaying grinders like the original Final Fantasy Games. I find most online gaming isn't designed for Role Playing - Star Trek online a fine example of NOT DESIGNED FOR ROLL PLAYING! So I confine most of that sort of thing to either single player game experiences or table top gaming. Computers and the Roll Playing part of gaming still have a long way to go in my opinion, but if they get there I'll gladly hop on board.

I play D&D and role play characters in my brain when playing single player RPGs. That's about it though.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked