As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Why do you play single player games?

1246

Posts

  • Fizban140Fizban140 Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2009
    I have trouble playing some games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion after I beat them. I will run around the world and see the last few cool things there are to see and then be done with it. I can not understand the people who spend hours and hours by themselves in single player worlds that they have already completed everything in. Like people who just wander around Fallout 3 waiting for something to happen, what is the point? After 45 minutes of running around a scorpion attacks you and you launch it across the map. Is that fun?

    I can't do that, once I am done with a single player game I am done with it and I will usually not play it again unless it is for an achievment or it has been a long time and I forgot the story. Multiplayer games are almost always more fun and definitely more exciting to me.

    Fizban140 on
  • MangarooMangaroo LondonRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I'm similar...it's rare that I even complete the game. Even with portal, I loved the game so much that after I completed it I did some research about map packs, sifted to find the highest rated, downloaded and installed, checked to see if it works only to close and never play it again. I actually just had to let go of it after months of not touching them (HDD space was short).

    When I mentioned exploring before, I meant I like to scope various directions, see what's behind each path (within reason) and then take one, as opposed to co-op etc where you just pick one quick and charge full speed ahead so you don't worry about the other player getting bored.

    Btw what games are you lot playing that you seem to get insulted so much? I haven't been seriously insulted after I left cs..
    ..and not much then
    i was pro
    you guys must really suck :P

    Mangaroo on
  • PendegastPendegast Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Rohan wrote: »
    So I can be left on my own to let my imagination run away with itself.

    The OP doesn't appear to have one of those, which is the basic core of his problem.

    Pendegast on
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    Because you seem to view games as being inherently about competing against other players, rather than directly about the gameplay, story or other things.

    You can love playing soccer and not care about winning or losing too.

    There's nothing wrong with that perspective, but it doesn't cover the whole spectrum of what a game can be.

    EDIT: You specifically singled out patterns as inferior to real players. That sounds to me like someone thinking about sports game (where I use "sport" loosely to refer to directly competitive games like FPSes or actual sports games) AI.

    It's less that I think they're superior, and more that I favor a dynamic environment. Players try and do crazy things that AI never does and you can never be quite sure how they will react, due to an unlimited number of circumstances. But the single-player game also limits that, because the majority of people, I imagine, don't want a a single random bad-guy organizing ten other bad guys to flank you when you least expect it.

    To me it sounds like you think the options are playing a multiplayer FPS against humans or playing a multiplayer FPS against bots. If you are trying to fit every other game into this one experience, I can see how it wouldn't be fun.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • jclastjclast Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    If you want random and challenging (and can handle the "graphics") check out NetHack.

    jclast on
    camo_sig2.png
  • ZzuluZzulu Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Well I love both movies and books, and games are no different.

    A good game with a good story can be really engrossing and immersive.

    I guess some people have an easier time to enjoy the imaginary

    Zzulu on
    t5qfc9.jpg
  • unknownsome1unknownsome1 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I could answer the thread title by simply saying "cause they're fun" but I'll be more specific.

    I enjoy the experience offered in single player games that are not offered in multiplayer such as certain level designs, puzzles, enemies, and bosses although much of this can be enjoyed in a co-op mode as well. Sometimes, I don't feel like playing against other people (especially anonymous people over the internet) and just want to enjoy a solo adventure. Plus, there's sometimes stories to enjoy in games but I look at gameplay way more than story.

    unknownsome1 on
  • Vladimir7Vladimir7 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I like both MP and SP games.
    I don't really care for playing MP games with people I don't know. I have 2 RL friends that we all basically like the exact same games as each other, so we will play TF2 and L4D together a fair bit. But when they are unavailable to play, then I like to play SP games. SP games story, atmosphere, etc is a lot more interesting than MP (which usually there is none). I also don't need to be competitive with any loot, build my character the "cookie cutter" way or I will be kicked from a group, listen to retards over voice chat, etc. I can do anything I want to any time I want to at any pace I want to.

    Fallout 3, Bioshock, etc just wouldn't be the same running around with other people.
    Me - "I want to explore every nook and cranny of Rapture",
    Other random people -" FUCK YOU NOOB. WTF HURRY. COME ON. GO. RUSH RUSH RUSH. OMG YOUR SO SLOW. MAN YOU SUCK WHY ARE YOU USING THE SHOTGUN INSTEAD OF THE CHEMICAL THROWER YOU RETARD L2P. HAHA FAG I JUST NINJA LOOTED THIS PLASMID UPGRADE EVEN THOUGH YOU DON'T HAVE ANY"
    This exact shit happened when I was playing diablo 2 online. I wanted to take it kind of easy, and everyone else wanted to rush to the boss as fast as they can.

    Another important thing is, if you stick to MP only games, or the reverse- SP only games, you are missing out on amazing games. MP would be missing out on Fallout 3, bioshock, and many others. And SP people would be missing out on L4D (yeah ok they can play campaign SP, but the real fun is Versus & Survival -- which the bots suck at) and others.



    For the majority of the time I keep MP gaming to my computer, and SP gaming to my consoles. (I would say 2/3 of the time I play MP, 1/3 of the time SP)

    Vladimir7 on
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    There's also the issue of sometimes, I just don't want to wait for a server to open/fill up.

    Fencingsax on
  • chamberlainchamberlain Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Gaming is not a social activity for everyone. The beauty of it as a hobby or way to pass the time is that it works either way, with games around to cator to anyone's taste. The OP mentioned that games were around when he 'wasn't doing judo.' If he is seriously training in judo then he may have the state of mind that every activity must have a benefit, or at least improve his abiliies in an area. Play mulitplayer shooters constatly and you will improve. Play SFIV a lot and you will either get better (or bust your arcade stick in a nerd rage << >>). The single player games the OP mentioned, Ninja Gaiden to be specific, benefit from the same 'training' aspect, though I am not sure of SotC works in to this.

    There is no skill benefit to most single player games. They are an experiences with little skill benefit outside of an emotional one. That being said, I play more then most anyone else I know, and it is almost never multiplayer. I have a full set of Rock Back instruments and an embarassing about of DLC that no one else ever sees, and that's just the way I like it. It's my hobby, one that I don't necessarily want to share.

    chamberlain on
  • korodullinkorodullin What. SCRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I don't know if it's been mentioned by someone else, but I tend to play single-player games (aside from MMOs) because I play slowly. FPSes online? Yeah, that's fine in deathmatch or CTF or capture-and-defend, since those are designed for multiple people. But online co-op? Can't do it. I'm just too slow and methodical. It's also why I have a rough time playing something like Baldur's Gate II co-op. I also alt-tab a lot.

    I also play RTS games in solo skirmish mode the majority of the time (my favorite for it's always been the original Rise of Nations) since I completely suck at them online. Also games like Total War tend to be boring online because they're nothing but battles, which get tiring without the campaign map to spice things up a bit.

    korodullin on
    ZvOMJnu.png
    - The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
  • LutExIVLutExIV Thieves Guild Chairman In the ShadowsRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I think I have a pretty good balance between SP and MP. I would say I play almost 50/50, and I must say, a person confining themselves to one side or the other is really missing out on a large breadth of experience. As mentioned before, some games MP would completely ruin the experience, while others on just SP would be boring and pointless.


    I will say a few things about ether though. I love games that have an immersive singleplayer experience. It liken it to reading a good book or watching an excellent movie. When I play a game where the story really sucks me in, I take ownership of that protagonist; I care what happens next, I get excited when good things happen, and feel angry or vengeful when I deal with controversy.

    Another note about my MP habits: I REFUSE to play in Pub games anymore. I am a grown man, I have kids of my own (who play as well) and I will be GODDAMNED if I'm gonna let some snot nosed teenaged pussy scream obscenities to me through the security of online obscurity simply because I am not playing the game his way. People like that can choke on a bag of dicks and die for all I care. That's why when I rock MP, I only play with guys on my friends list. Now we may fill out a MP roster with a Pub or two here or there, but if they start that obnoxious shit, they get booted fast. Now to be fair, I will say that I have met some decent people online that started as Pubs, but are now on my friends list....

    LutExIV on
    26965406221_865f825658.jpg
    Steam/PSN/XBox Live:LutExIV
  • Ragnar DragonfyreRagnar Dragonfyre Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I usually play single player games for the same reason I read a good book, for the story, characters and to relax. I really enjoy a game with good plot and characters (read: not just stats) development. You can't really get that in a multiplayer game.

    Multiplayer games are great for competitive reasons. If I want to feel challenged, I'll play a game online, or play Soul Calibur with friends. I like multiplayer games and all, but I can't relax while playing them. If I'm playing with a shitty team, then I get stressed. After a long day at work, the last thing I want is more stress.

    Lately, I haven't been playing a lot of multiplayer games because I hit a breaking point in dealing with retarded teammates. So I've been working through the backlog that piled up while spending almost all my game time exclusively online.

    Ragnar Dragonfyre on
    steam_sig.png
  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Talking of that. People who bitch about others swearing in an online shooter are hilarious. If they're insulting everyone sure but I remember someone trying to chew me out for shouting shit for getting taken down by a (beautifully thrown) plasma. You’re okay with intense violence but ruh roh better not use bad language, what?

    Leitner on
  • Hockey JohnstonHockey Johnston Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    L4D, even though it's primarily co-op, gives a real insight into the kinds of things you can't do in a MP game.

    Think about how hard that game tries to balance asymmetrical character types in a MP setting (the Survivors are powerful in some ways and the Infected play a completely different kind of game) and then you'll get some sense of why games don't pull that off more often. It's just difficult. People don't like playing as cannon fodder, they don't like being forced to give the main characters some breathing room, they want to win every time, and they'll try to break the experience in any way they can.

    Longevity is a great asset of MP games, but there are a whole range of game experiences that you just can't have in a competitive context. That's why co-op has become more popular -- it lets the people who enjoy MP get a taste of what used to be the exclusively SP game experiences, like solving environmental puzzles or progressing through a story together.

    But co-op still ends up being like a watered down SP experience, because the whole thing has to move at a pace that is interesting for multiple people at once.

    Hockey Johnston on
  • SagrothSagroth Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Because I have Asperger's, which basically means I'm a high functioning Autistic.

    It also means I have to try a lot harder than most to interact successfully with others.

    I play games to relax. I don't always want to focus on making sure I'm coming across ok with everyone else while playing a game.

    Sagroth on
    3DS Code: 5155-3087-0800
  • VeganVegan Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Everyone thinks they have Asperger's lol. The geek chic disease.

    Vegan on
    steam_sig.png
  • UncleSporkyUncleSporky Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Vegan wrote: »
    Everyone thinks they have Asperger's lol. The geek chic disease.

    Are you implying that the above poster doesn't suffer from a debilitating condition?

    UncleSporky on
    Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Vegan wrote: »
    Everyone thinks they have Asperger's lol. The geek chic disease.

    You... you realise how dickish it is to claim that someone’s making up an illness when you have no evidence this is the case right? Or equally claiming that it isn't real/is over diagnosed/belittling it? Because when people do that for dyslexia I have a strong anti-social urge to knock their teeth out.

    Edit: Hi5 Sporky.

    Leitner on
  • VeganVegan Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    You're right, maybe he does. But soooo many people claim to have it, it's always hard to take seriously when you hear it.

    Vegan on
    steam_sig.png
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    @Faffel: Out of interest - do you read fiction? If so, how difficult is it for you to relate to the characters that are created entirely by words on a page?

    Thirith on
    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • ZerokkuZerokku Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Thirith wrote: »
    @Faffel: Out of interest - do you read fiction? If so, how difficult is it for you to relate to the characters that are created entirely by words on a page?

    He actually already answered that -
    Faffel wrote: »
    So, OP having the same problem with movies...you want them to have the unpredictability of the human mind? What's wrong with movies and books?

    You're linking two unconnected sentences. I said that I don't get immersed in books or movies either, and I was wondering why and how people get immersed like that. I don't get immersed because I can't care about the characters... why should I? They're just creations. It bothers me, but I can't help it.

    Not to come off the wrong way/rude, I find that sort of sad. He's missing out on so many amazing experiences and stories because of this.

    Zerokku on
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Thanks, I missed that one.

    I agree with you - it is sort of sad. Since I've been an avid reader since an early age and I love getting affected by good fiction, it strikes me almost as a form of blindness: an absence of a sense that I find as central to myself as vision or hearing.

    Thirith on
    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • ZerokkuZerokku Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Thirith wrote: »
    Thanks, I missed that one.

    I agree with you - it is sort of sad. Since I've been an avid reader since an early age and I love getting affected by good fiction, it strikes me almost as a form of blindness: an absence of a sense that I find as central to myself as vision or hearing.

    Exactly. I often can get so immersed in a good book that I don't even realize I'm reading but am able to "see" or imagine the events going quite easily.

    Zerokku on
  • ThirithThirith Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    It strikes me as interesting on a cognitive level. I wonder how Faffel relates to 'real' people that he only knows from reading about them or hearing someone speak about them, because he experiences them exactly the same way he'd experience a character in a novel - the only difference being that he's told by someone that they're real.

    Thirith on
    webp-net-resizeimage.jpg
    "Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
  • NaloutoNalouto Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    It's not why the immersion is fun that I don't understand - it's the immersion itself. I understand why people would find it fun if they could get into the world, but I've never been able to wrap my head around how you do it in the first place. I even see people get into the worlds and stories of 4x's, which generally have nothing outside of a very loose lore. People seem to be able to get so into that they can fill in the blanks and feel fulfilled by it. That's a very interesting ability that I've never been able to do myself, and it fascinates me. It also confuses me.


    It's called IMAGINATION.

    Get one..

    Seriously, if you can't "lose yourself" in the story or world of a video game without getting distracted or bored, or feel the need to go play with "real people" online, then you may just be missing the point of SP gaming entirely... Imagination and Immersion go hand in hand. It is EXACTLY like absorbing yourself in a good book or movie.

    Saying that multiplayer is a more realistic "learning" experience when you play online is probably not the best comparison, as actions are learned, copied, mimicked and repeated ad nauseum just the same way (if not worse) in MP... People jump-strafe and build turrets in the same exact places... the same way everyone jumps for the first goomba or steals that first bike in GTA. - The difference is people will criticize you for not "doing it right" if you play your own commando style online for long enough. (TF2 is a great example, great game, but can be repetitive for the exact reasons you say it's fresh.)

    It's a shame you can't understand the brilliance of losing yourself in a good single-player game world, it's possible you may be losing touch with your inner child or inner imagination. It's the big kid in me that will always enjoy gaming (and game-storytelling), alone, online or even just in my own head, re-acting out my favorite game stories and experiences.



    "When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."


    -C.S Lewis

    Nalouto on
    :winky:
  • firewaterwordfirewaterword Satchitananda Pais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    I dig solo games primarily because, generally speaking, I don't have the time nor the inclination to get good enough to really enjoy most multiplayer stuff.

    Also, I can turn it off any time without screwing up anyone else's game.

    firewaterword on
    Lokah Samastah Sukhino Bhavantu
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    I think the OP's problem is that he sees videogames as sports.

    Because I don't care about winning or losing and enjoy the experience when I find the rare case of singleplayer enjoyment? The only reason time I care about competition is if I'm wasting through my opponents - it's not fun for either party when you roll a bunch of new/poor players.

    Huh? I'm not sure I understand your response. I was just suggesting a possible reason for why the way you feel the way you do, after having thought about it for a while.

    Sports are about having fun competition between people*. I think your problem with single player experiences is that you derive your enjoyment from games the way people often derive enjoyment from sports.

    I don't mean to sound deragatory because I'm not. I'm suggesting a possibility.



    * - some sports can be played "single player," I know.. But you get what I mean.

    slash000 on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    About 10 years ago I was playing Doom, and my brother came in watching me and asked, "Why do you play this? What's the point. There's no story! What's the point of shooting a random bunch of computer controlled goons and getting to an exit? Games are pointless without story; you don't gain anything from it. There's little ultimate underlying goal or incentive, you don't sympathize with the characters, there's no plot development or characterization, there's no twist, there's no real moral dilemma, no moral question to ponder, no real internal conflict. What's the point?"

    It was hard to explain to him how fast paced arcadey action could be fun when, from his point of view, the only satisfaction that can be derived from a game is from a satisfying and entertaining story.

    In his view, games could only have a "point" in much the same way books or movies have a "point." He could not see past that.


    This thread reminds me of that day/conversation.

    slash000 on
  • FaffelFaffel Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    slash000 wrote: »
    Faffel wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    I think the OP's problem is that he sees videogames as sports.

    Because I don't care about winning or losing and enjoy the experience when I find the rare case of singleplayer enjoyment? The only reason time I care about competition is if I'm wasting through my opponents - it's not fun for either party when you roll a bunch of new/poor players.

    Huh? I'm not sure I understand your response. I was just suggesting a possible reason for why the way you feel the way you do, after having thought about it for a while.

    Sports are about having fun competition between people*. I think your problem with single player experiences is that you derive your enjoyment from games the way people often derive enjoyment from sports.

    I don't mean to sound deragatory because I'm not. I'm suggesting a possibility.



    * - some sports can be played "single player," I know.. But you get what I mean.

    When people say competition, I generally equate it with winning or losing, because that's what people tend to obsess about. I figured that's what you meant when you said sports - I guess you could say that the clashing with another person is what I enjoy. It adds life to the game.
    It strikes me as interesting on a cognitive level. I wonder how Faffel relates to 'real' people that he only knows from reading about them or hearing someone speak about them, because he experiences them exactly the same way he'd experience a character in a novel - the only difference being that he's told by someone that they're real.

    I'm not being told by someone that they're real - either the person at the keyboard exists, or he doesn't. There's no Schroedinger's cat via fibrewire here.

    Faffel on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    When people say competition, I generally equate it with winning or losing, because that's what people tend to obsess about. I figured that's what you meant when you said sports - I guess you could say that the clashing with another person is what I enjoy. It adds life to the game.

    I guess the difficulty you have may be purely psychological - when you know you're playing AI, you don't get that feeling of it "adding life" to the game and it's pointless no matter what parts of the brain it engages in terms of skillset. But when you know you're playing people, no matter how good, bad, repetitive they are, foolish in their mistakes, easy to predict - or alternatively how absurdly good they are - you know that it's "real" and it's adding life as you feel it is (it is literally, but I mean this in an 'adding life' in such a way that makes it 'fun' for you). I think that the knowledge that you're playing people is making it the only thing that makes it worthwhile for you.

    But what I think you're missing in terms of perspective from other game types is that this distinction is actually very arbitrary. Why do you need clashing with other people to have fun?




    I'm going to repost this because it reminds me heavily of this topic:

    About 10 years ago I was playing Doom, and my brother came in watching me and asked, "Why do you play this? What's the point. There's no story! What's the point of shooting a random bunch of computer controlled goons and getting to an exit? Games are pointless without story; you don't gain anything from it. There's little ultimate underlying goal or incentive, you don't sympathize with the characters, there's no plot development or characterization, there's no twist, there's no real moral dilemma, no moral question to ponder, no real internal conflict. What's the point?"

    It was hard to explain to him how fast paced arcadey action could be fun when, from his point of view, the only satisfaction that can be derived from a game is from a satisfying and entertaining story.

    In his view, games could only have a "point" in much the same way books or movies have a "point." He could not see past that.


    This thread reminds me of that day/conversation.

    slash000 on
  • DisruptorX2DisruptorX2 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    So did your brother never play video games before like 1998 or something?

    DisruptorX2 on
    1208768734831.jpg
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    So did your brother never play video games before like 1998 or something?

    He played them as a young child.. stopped as he got older.. then picked them back up again with 16 bit RPGs like Chrono Trigger and Secret of Mana.

    That was at about the point this conversation took place.

    But indeed he felt this way about 99.9% of games he deemed as having unworthy "story." As very pointless, or rather, he couldn't see why there was anything worth playing about games without "story." He couldn't "get" why I was having fun shooting mindless AI imps in Doom without a "real story." Couldn't understand why I would play such a thing. He almost never played games as a result (except the very rare RPG here and there).

    I talked about it with him for an hour or two. Didn't make a difference. He just couldn't see how it could be fun without "getting something out of it," which could only be derived from a meaningful story.


    This thread reminds me of that conversation. "Having a great story" as being the metric for having a point/being fun is just as arbitrary as "playing against other people." These are just two different ways of "getting something" out of games. We all have our tastes and opinions of games. But I feel kind of sorry for people who can't at least see how other types of gameplay can be fun or do something for the person playing.



    This also kind of reminds me about how some people think that Guitar Hero / Rock Band is pointless/unfun/not getting anything from it because it's not real instruments and/or you're not in a real band.

    slash000 on
  • spamfilterspamfilter Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    So did your brother never play video games before like 1998 or something?

    Probably played computers, there are plenty of computers games even as far back as the early 80's that had a story. Even text only ones like "A Mind Forever Voyaging".

    As for the original topic, different people get different things out of games. I myself almost NEVER play multiplayer, except in co-op mode.

    There are two types of games, the competitive game where the goal is for one player to beat the other, and there are objective drive games where the goal is for a player to reach an objective. I prefer objective driven games.

    spamfilter on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    spamfilter wrote: »
    So did your brother never play video games before like 1998 or something?

    Probably played computers,

    Yes, he also played lots of Point/Click adventure games like Grim Fandango.

    slash000 on
  • .Tripwire..Tripwire. Firman Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Why do you collect stamps? There is no reason for it!

    .Tripwire. on
    sigi_moe.pngsigi_deviantart.pngsigi_twitter.pngsigi_steam.pngsigi_tumblr.png
  • FaffelFaffel Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    .Tripwire. wrote: »
    Why do you collect stamps? There is no reason for it!

    There really isn't.

    Faffel on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • firewaterwordfirewaterword Satchitananda Pais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    .Tripwire. wrote: »
    Why do you collect stamps? There is no reason for it!

    There really isn't.

    I can think of 9.5 million reasons.

    firewaterword on
    Lokah Samastah Sukhino Bhavantu
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Why do people paint? Why do some people like to build things? Why do some people watch movies or read books? Why do some people like to go jogging or hiking?

    None of these involve the "clash between people," yet they are fun for the individuals. It's hard to explain the underlying reasons, but what I mean to point out is that you have to see that there are different ways to enjoy activities.

    Maybe someone likes to paint because they like to be creative, constructive, and produce beautiful works. They might look at playing sports or videogames as pointless because you're not being constructive and producing aesthetic tangible things... Sounds silly doesn't it? It sounds silly because we can see that there is satisfaction and enjoyment derived from these different activities for different reasons, and one activity may not necessarily be fully compatible with the type of 'satisfaction' you get from another.

    Likewise, playing multiplayer for "the human element" is just one way to derive satisfaction, and perhaps that cannot be replicated through AI. But playing a single player game and playing multiplayer, for some people, the satisfaction for one doesn't exist in the other. For other people, they get soemthing out of both. And yet for others, they may not get anything out of one, but can still at least see how the other might be fun for some people.

    And they can argue, "But, it doesn't have Element X that I like about this style of gameplay." Well! That's what makes it different! Why does the other need that Element X to be fun? (this you would ask yourself)

    slash000 on
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2009
    Faffel wrote: »
    .Tripwire. wrote: »
    Why do you collect stamps? There is no reason for it!

    There really isn't.

    I can think of 9.5 million reasons.

    Some guy recently sold a Comics collection for over $600,000. Not as impressive I know. But one particular book went for over $100k by itself....

    What I want to know is who is paying that much money for the things! :P

    slash000 on
Sign In or Register to comment.