The Walking Dead

[Al B. Sure!]

Is Skyrim just a game for noobs who suck too much at COD to play online? So they play a crappy offline RPG instead?

Just wonderin'

[Al B. Sure!]

HC: Your K/D now. What is it?

[Aeson]

Is Skyrim the latest Daggerfall with better graphics?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Yes, real men play Serious Sam though

[Asher]

HC: Your K/D now. What is it?

KD? Is that some black thing?

[Elok]

Is Skyrim just a game for noobs who suck too much at COD to play online? So they play a crappy offline RPG instead?

Just wonderin'

I've played neither game, but I have seen someone play Black Ops. "Crappy RPG" would actually be a fair description of what I saw. Only nobody bothered to work together, so when they actually accomplished the "quest" objective, it was largely by accident.

[Aeson]

"Crappy RPG" in FPS refers to the guy who blows up his teammates and/or self with a poorly aimed grenades

[Al B. Sure!]

I've played neither game, but I have seen someone play Black Ops. "Crappy RPG" would actually be a fair description of what I saw. Only nobody bothered to work together, so when they actually accomplished the "quest" objective, it was largely by accident.

Play with a team, man. Teams dominate in Call of Duty. It's ridiculous how much working together gives you an advantage.

As randoms, though, it's like capitalism. Everyone doing their own thing but getting **** done.

KD? Is that some black thing?

His Kill/Death ratio

[Hauldren Collider]

I don't play COD online. I thought black ops was awful, although I liked Modern Warfare 2 and COD4. I'm probably not going to bother to get MW3, since I've already got too many finals to take and too many games to play and these things are not synergistic at all.

[Elok]

Play with a team, man. Teams dominate in Call of Duty. It's ridiculous how much working together gives you an advantage.

As randoms, though, it's like capitalism. Everyone doing their own thing but getting **** done.

Yeah, I'm sure it would help to play as a team, only I saw a bunch of teenagers apparently playing against a bunch of other teenagers, nominally in teams but really just flailing around separately. It looked like the game did a crummy job of giving the players an incentive for cooperation; exp. or whatever you call it is given for kills and other individual accomplishments, so basically gameplay devolved into a mindless grind, everybody running in circles trying to rack up as many kills/special accomplishments as possible and to hell with objectives. And when that match is done, you play another, on the same map or one of perhaps a half-dozen others whose layout you've memorized. Grind, grind, grind.

So, basically the same as an MMORPG, only I understand in RPGs you eventually get cool stuff for leveling up, like a dragon to fly around on or the ability to resurrect the dead. In Black Ops, at least, you start with a really lousy set of weapons (SMG 1, Assault Rifle 1, Pistol 1, whatever) and gradually upgrade through a series of less and less lousy ones. SMG 2 is slightly more accurate, or perhaps has a slightly better rate of fire, than SMG 1, and SMG 3 is slightly better in some respect than SMG 2, but they're basically the same damn weapon with a different graphic and slightly tweaked specs. As the overwhelming majority of deaths come from either killstreaks or a guy sneaking behind you and firing a burst into your back, even this progress is largely illusory. It's a difference between taking one second of fire to kill somebody at the beginning of the game and taking .75 seconds of fire to kill somebody at level eight bajillion.

Now, I've never played the Elder Scrolls whatever either, since it all sounds like a variation on the same post-Tolkien high fantasy playground gamers have been running around in since Gygax grew facial hair. But it apparently involves a number of different character types who play differently, an absurdly deep world to play in (as in, you can pick up bloody novels off the shelf and read them), and rewards which actually affect gameplay.

So, I have to ask: which of these is a crappy RPG?

[Al B. Sure!]

I don't play COD online. I thought black ops was awful, although I liked Modern Warfare 2 and COD4. I'm probably not going to bother to get MW3, since I've already got too many finals to take and too many games to play and these things are not synergistic at all.

*cough*

Is Skyrim just a game for noobs who suck too much at COD to play online? So they play a crappy offline RPG instead?

Just wonderin'

yup

[Hauldren Collider]

No way in hell could someone just have different tastes in games!

[Al B. Sure!]

Yeah, I'm sure it would help to play as a team, only I saw a bunch of teenagers apparently playing against a bunch of other teenagers, nominally in teams but really just flailing around separately. It looked like the game did a crummy job of giving the players an incentive for cooperation; exp. or whatever you call it is given for kills and other individual accomplishments, so basically gameplay devolved into a mindless grind, everybody running in circles trying to rack up as many kills/special accomplishments as possible and to hell with objectives. And when that match is done, you play another, on the same map or one of perhaps a half-dozen others whose layout you've memorized. Grind, grind, grind.

So, basically the same as an MMORPG, only I understand in RPGs you eventually get cool stuff for leveling up, like a dragon to fly around on or the ability to resurrect the dead. In Black Ops, at least, you start with a really lousy set of weapons (SMG 1, Assault Rifle 1, Pistol 1, whatever) and gradually upgrade through a series of less and less lousy ones. SMG 2 is slightly more accurate, or perhaps has a slightly better rate of fire, than SMG 1, and SMG 3 is slightly better in some respect than SMG 2, but they're basically the same damn weapon with a different graphic and slightly tweaked specs. As the overwhelming majority of deaths come from either killstreaks or a guy sneaking behind you and firing a burst into your back, even this progress is largely illusory. It's a difference between taking one second of fire to kill somebody at the beginning of the game and taking .75 seconds of fire to kill somebody at level eight bajillion.

Now, I've never played the Elder Scrolls whatever either, since it all sounds like a variation on the same post-Tolkien high fantasy playground gamers have been running around in since Gygax grew facial hair. But it apparently involves a number of different character types who play differently, an absurdly deep world to play in (as in, you can pick up bloody novels off the shelf and read them), and rewards which actually affect gameplay.

So, I have to ask: which of these is a crappy RPG?

There's UAV's that help your team-mates see where the enemy is. And now there's support killstreaks where you drop ballistic vests for your team or you can control a flying recon drone and spot enemies for your team-mates instead of getting a bombing run or something. You get quite a lot of XP for those.

But you're right that a game like Battlefield 3 rewards cooperation more than Call of Duty does. I just am a lot better at MW3 than BF3 for some reason.

[Al B. Sure!]

No way in hell could someone just have different tastes in games!

[Hauldren Collider]

Your posts of "u mad" make you look like a dufus.

Also that shirt is epic, where can I get one?