Need some fresh eyes on these arguments I am having with a friend

[Dherune Drygar]

Hello gamers of Bluemoon. As the title of this thread suggests, I have been involved in some long standing arguments with a friend of mine and it has got be questioning my sanity. I am gonna do my best to convey both sides here but I am interested in what everyone else thinks.

Argument one: Games like Destiny and Fallout 76 should not be called multiplayer. My friend believes that it would be more accurate to call them online games because multiplayer doesn't adequately capture all the experiences one can have in those games, both being able to be played single player for large chunks of them, if not the entire way through with a game like Fallout 76 and its private servers. I acknowledge that one could call them online games, but insist that one's experiences with them does not define the games and that both are clearly meant to be played multiplayer from the ground up, so it would not be wrong to call them multiplayer games.

Argument two: My friend does not think that it is accurate to call Co-op a form of multiplayer, primarily because they insist that co-op can be played solo by virtue of connecting a second controller and playing as both characters. Again, I do not deny that you can connect a second controller to do this and so she is techinically right, but I do not believe this is a good faith argument because it ignores the intent that such modes were created in mind with. Co-op is short for co-operative and you don't co-operate with yourself, you do so with other people.

So I would be interested in hearing what other people think. I have summarized our points as sincintly as possible and don't doubt that they would argue I did not do a good enough job but I really just needed to get this off my chest and see what other people thought. So thoughts?

 

[Bejeweled]

Huh.

I think games like that would be called single-player or multiplayer, it all depends on how you play it. There are definitely ways to play the game as both. Any game considered "multi-player" likely also has a solo campaign of sorts, and I think so many games nowadays (if they aren't strictly solo-player mode) most people play as a kind of hybrid. One way might be more popularly known or accepted, but that's probably a different argument. It's like saying a romantic comedy can't be called a romance or can't be called just a comedy. It's both, maybe leaning more one way than the other depending on how you look at it.

I don't know how anyone could think co-op isn't multiplayer by default. Similar to the above point, I think co-op is more commonly multi-player, though it can of course take the form of one person using two controllers, but again, I'd think this is much less common.

I'd just say shades of grey exist and things don't have to be black or white, but that's just me.

 

[Dherune Drygar]

Thank you. That has definitely been what I have been trying to tell them on both fronts but they just won't listen and nothing I say seems to make a lick of difference. Games are so sophisticated these days that one game could be referred to multiple ways but they keep saying "No, they have multiplayer in them but it is wrong to call them a multiplayer game." It makes no sense to me.

But even with you technically being able to connect a second controller, I would argue you aren't actually playing solo because there is no way you are getting through a level of Borderlands with two controllers in your hands and shifting your gaze from one side of the screen to the other. Like to be able to do that, you'd have to be in the top fraction of a percent of people.

 

[Bejeweled]

Eh. I'd just agree to disagree at that point. Don't really think it matters who's "right" here.

 

[ƒeral]

words like 'multiplayer', 'co-op', 'single-player' exist as tags.

something can have multiple tags

i think it's completely reasonable for a game to be tagged as single-player, co-op, and multi-player

as for when the tags apply, i would say a lot of discretion go into this. for simplicity, we'll say a 'reasonable' amount of element x merit a tag of x

given that premise, if your friend claim a game that has a multi-player mode is not multi-player, i would disagree

similarly, the co-op argument is particularly flawed, because as you said, co-op by definition imply accommodating multiple people playing

 

[Dherune Drygar]

I can't tell whether you got my back or not feral but I am gonna to assume the prior lol
As for what you said Black Magic, I am too stubborn to just let things go when they seem so clearly wrong to me xD

 

[ƒeral]

long story short, i agree with you. the longer post was just laying out the premise for why i would agree

 

[Dherune Drygar]

Thought so lol Thanks xP

 

[Chalarm]

My thoughts are pretty much the same as what everyone else has said. The idea between multiplayer/co-op/online is such a venn diagram that all terms can justifiably be used to define a particular game in many cases. It being one does not stop it from being another.

However the second argument made me laugh. Just because something can be played differently doesn't mean that it's stops being any other gametype. Just because I can speedrun "The Sims" doesn't stop it from being a life simulation game. Just because I could play Halo with a Rockband controller only performing melee attacks doesn't stop it from being a shooter game and turn it into a music game.

 

[MacCloud]

I don't many video games but the function that seems the greater would be the one I would consider as the main title. I do play DDO and it is a multi player game, with a single player capability. But is designed to be played with a team of players. Yet you can play it totally alone. I have played it as a single player to 22nd level and using NPC's I have defeated sections that require two people. To say it is a one player game limits the capability of the system. It was designed as a multiplayer game. World of warcraft is the same way, you can play with a team, but you could run alone. The greater capability though would decide the definition.

An airplane can be powered by different types of engines. A jet plane is on type of airplane. If you only wanted to fly in a jet plane you are limiting your own choices. That does not disallow the other airplanes from existing. Your choice to limit something does not infringe of the capabilities of the whole. So DDO is a multiplayer game, me deciding to only play solo does not alter the capabilities of the system.

Than what do I know? Just a guy with an opinion. I also agree with you DD

 

[Dherune Drygar]

Thank you Chalarm and MacCloud c:

 

[Silvered Sutures]

As far as the first argument is concerned, I firmly believe that games should NOT be devoid of a single player mode and so not calling a game multiplayer simply because you can play them solo is irrelevant, because in an ideal world that should be the default.

As for the second argument, a co-operative game is exactly that and I agree with you.