.

[Nifft Batuff]

Blobber is any game that self-refers so. Like any RPGs in the Codex.

 

[GrafvonMoltke]

Shit is what it is.

 

[Rincewind]

Shit is what it is.

 

[Darth Canoli]

Blobbers were blobbers way before this retarded thread was started and will still be blobbers when this conversation goes straight to the retardoland.

Well, at least this thread was a coming out for Rusty and his simps.

 

[BruceVC]

"Blobber" is basically a convenience term coined on the Codex (IIRC, I believe it emerged here as a common term during the early 2010s) to refer to games where you control a party in a first person game.
It's a more convenient thing to say than "first person party-based dungeon crawler", or explicitly referring to "Wizardry clones" or "M&M clones" or "Dungeon Master clones" or "games that share the movement of Wizardry, Might and Magic, and Dungeon Master, which is the one defining feature that serves as a similarity between the three branches of CRPG lineage, while other mechanics might differ (wego TB vs igougo TB vs real-time)".

Blobber is much shorter and snappier.

rusty_shackleford and Atlantico, why don't you get it finally that every single game is a blobber; you just need to put a few more words before it and then it's clear what you're talking about?

By the way, it's inconsequential what we think; we should ask the game whether it identifies as a blobber or not.

I demand a "Member of the Cult of Blob" tag for every member that identifies games as "blobbers" against their wishes!

Rince I think to suggest every single game is a blobber adds unnecessary confusion to a debate around semantics

Dont you agree with JarlFranks definition as the most accurate and if you dont what do you specifically disagree with ?

 

[Rincewind]

"Blobber" is basically a convenience term coined on the Codex (IIRC, I believe it emerged here as a common term during the early 2010s) to refer to games where you control a party in a first person game.
It's a more convenient thing to say than "first person party-based dungeon crawler", or explicitly referring to "Wizardry clones" or "M&M clones" or "Dungeon Master clones" or "games that share the movement of Wizardry, Might and Magic, and Dungeon Master, which is the one defining feature that serves as a similarity between the three branches of CRPG lineage, while other mechanics might differ (wego TB vs igougo TB vs real-time)".

Blobber is much shorter and snappier.

rusty_shackleford and Atlantico, why don't you get it finally that every single game is a blobber; you just need to put a few more words before it and then it's clear what you're talking about?

By the way, it's inconsequential what we think; we should ask the game whether it identifies as a blobber or not.

I demand a "Member of the Cult of Blob" tag for every member that identifies games as "blobbers" against their wishes!

Rince I think to suggest every single game is a blobber adds unnecessary confusion to a debate around semantics

Dont you agree with JarlFranks definition as the most accurate and if you dont what do you specifically disagree with ?

Because you asked, I've already explained why I quite dislike the term "blobber". Here's some reading material for you if you're really interested, I won't explain my points again. At this point I'm with Fowyr; it's a harmless name after all (even if it's quite wrong), so who cares what a bunch of people on an obscure forum call these games, really... I have better things to do than to "argue" about this, but sure it has some excellent trolling potential Btw, Atlantico has reached basically the exact same conclusions as I, as you'll see if you care to read what I wrote earlier.

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-5#post-7458288

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-6#post-7459941

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-6#post-7460675

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...-rpgs-poll-results.141815/page-6#post-7728913

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/rpg-codex-top-ten-vintage-rpgs-poll-results.141815/#post-7727454

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/rpg-codex-top-ten-vintage-rpgs-poll-results.141815/#post-7727242

 

[Trithne]

6 pages of autism and I'm still just on "huh, someone's tackling making a modern take on goldbox"

 

[BruceVC]

"Blobber" is basically a convenience term coined on the Codex (IIRC, I believe it emerged here as a common term during the early 2010s) to refer to games where you control a party in a first person game.
It's a more convenient thing to say than "first person party-based dungeon crawler", or explicitly referring to "Wizardry clones" or "M&M clones" or "Dungeon Master clones" or "games that share the movement of Wizardry, Might and Magic, and Dungeon Master, which is the one defining feature that serves as a similarity between the three branches of CRPG lineage, while other mechanics might differ (wego TB vs igougo TB vs real-time)".

Blobber is much shorter and snappier.

rusty_shackleford and Atlantico, why don't you get it finally that every single game is a blobber; you just need to put a few more words before it and then it's clear what you're talking about?

By the way, it's inconsequential what we think; we should ask the game whether it identifies as a blobber or not.

I demand a "Member of the Cult of Blob" tag for every member that identifies games as "blobbers" against their wishes!

Rince I think to suggest every single game is a blobber adds unnecessary confusion to a debate around semantics

Dont you agree with JarlFranks definition as the most accurate and if you dont what do you specifically disagree with ?

Because you asked, I've already explained why I quite dislike the term "blobber". Here's some reading material for you if you're really interested, I won't explain my points again. At this point I'm with Fowyr; it's a harmless name after all (even if it's quite wrong), so who cares what a bunch of people on an obscure forum call these games, really... I have better things to do than to "argue" about this, but sure it has some excellent trolling potential Btw, Atlantico has reached basically the exact same conclusions as I, as you'll see if you care to read what I wrote earlier.

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-5#post-7458288

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-6#post-7459941

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...imate-blobber-list.139799/page-6#post-7460675

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads...-rpgs-poll-results.141815/page-6#post-7728913

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/rpg-codex-top-ten-vintage-rpgs-poll-results.141815/#post-7727454

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/rpg-codex-top-ten-vintage-rpgs-poll-results.141815/#post-7727242

Thanks for taking the time to post these links, I will go through some of them

Last point from me on this topic, I consider this thread more of a debate than an argument. And its both interesting and relevant to anyone interested in the word " blobber " so I dont want you and others to think this is just a meaningless discussion. Its not to those following it

 

[Atlantico]

6 pages of autism and I'm still just on "huh, someone's tackling making a modern take on goldbox"

Oh yes, goldbox games are "blobbers" as you conclude. Clear and useful definition.

 

[Atlantico]

Blob is a group of characters that is compressed into a single unit which is controlled by the player in first person mode.
Blobbers are a computer role playing games in which player plays as a blob.

So Skyrim would be a blobber except it has a single character blob.

Then Dungeon Master played with one character is not a blobber, but add one character it is a blobber. Yet it's always the same game.

 

[Atlantico]

Legend of Grimrock is an example of a modern game that is a blobber. Skyrim wouldn't be a blobber, because player doesn't control a blob in first person view, but a single hero.

So if your magic abilities in Skyrim were defines as a mage "character" and your thief abilities were another character and your fighter abilities were another character, then it would be a blobber.

Exactly the same game, but now it is a blobber because reasons. Thus there is no meaningful difference between Skyrim and a "blobber". In Skyrim you're just a one man party with all the abilities otherwise found in "blobbers" fused into one character — a blob if you will.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Legend of Grimrock is an example of a modern game that is a blobber

So why doesn't it describe itself as one on its store page?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

So why doesn't it describe itself as one on its store page?

Well, blobber is a slang term. Same with the doom clones for example (doom is wolf3d clone btw.), they officially call them first person shooters.

So is roguelike, what's your point?

 

[Atlantico]

Yes, first person party based gameplay is a characteristic of a blobber.

About it being "party based": There's no gameplay difference between a single character with multiple abilities and a multiple pseudo-characters with distinct abilities.

Btw. Skyrim has companions.

No reason a "blobber" couldn't have companions.

I will give you another example. Let's say we have a two real time strategy games. One is set in the middle ages and one in the world war two setting. They play indentical, the only difference is the time period in which they are set. Which one of them would you call a "kingdoms" game?

RPG is an RPG no matter where or when it is set, because the description is about gameplay not setting.

"Blobber" is supposedly a gameplay description, a "first person party based RPG", which mean the only "difference" between that an any other first person RPG that it is "party based".

I write "difference", because being party based isn't a gameplay characteristic, it's just shorthand for having more than one ability in the player's hands.


In most modern titles, those abilites just mashed together in one superhuman mage/thief/fighter/priest "blob", e.g. in Skyrim. Which is apparently a blobber.

The end result is exactly the same.

 

[BlaineMono]

So Skyrim would be a blobber except it has a single character blob.

ur mum is a single character blob

 

[Sigourn]

In most modern titles, those abilites just mashed together in one superhuman mage/thief/fighter/priest "blob", e.g. in Skyrim. Which is apparently a blobber.

Why do you insist on being so wrong?
I've already explained it to you, but you choose to ignore it. If Skyrim allowed you to control multiple characters at once in a first-person perspective, it wouldn't play like it now does.

Adding companions to a game like Gothic (to make it feel more like Skyrim) is one thing that wouldn't change at all how the game works. But adding a party-based system would, because now the core gameplay of Skyrim and Gothic would be completely unfit to accomodate said companions. It would be an unplayable mess.

You've gone full retard in defending an indefensible position. Just admit you think "blobber" is a dumb name (even though it perfectly explains how these games work) and move on, because you've got nothing else going on for an argument.

 

[Atlantico]

Why do you insist on being so wrong?

That you disagree with me must give the grognards a chilling feeling, knowing that you're never correct about anything.

If Skyrim allowed you to control multiple characters at once in a first-person perspective, it wouldn't play like it now does.

What you call "blobbers" or think constitute "blobbers" doesn't actually allow you to control multiple characters at once, but multiple abilities one at a time. Like Skyrim.

There is no party system, you can't do anything with the "party members". It's all as if it was one character with multiple ... Skyrim.

No, it is not the same. Party characters differ from each other, they have individual portraits, stats, skills and so on.

Abilities have different icons, they level up individually, have different stats and so on. There is no material difference.

 

[KateMicucci]

Why do you insist on being so wrong?

That you disagree with me must give the grognards a chilling feeling, knowing that you're never correct about anything.

If Skyrim allowed you to control multiple characters at once in a first-person perspective, it wouldn't play like it now does.

What you call "blobbers" or think constitute "blobbers" doesn't actually allow you to control multiple characters at once, but multiple abilities one at a time. Like Skyrim.

There is no party system, you can't do anything with the "party members". It's all as if it was one character with multiple ... Skyrim.

No, it is not the same. Party characters differ from each other, they have individual portraits, stats, skills and so on.

Abilities have different icons, they level up individually, have different stats and so on. There is no material difference.

At least Rusty acting retarded about this is funny. You're just tedious.

 

[Atlantico]

At least Rusty acting retarded about this is funny. You're just tedious.

 

[Sigourn]

Atlantico has convinced me that any game is a strategy game if you decide to put some thought into strategy.

He is one argument away from claiming that any game is an RPG if you treat it like one.

 

[Atlantico]

Party pretending is a blobber thing, it's main characteristic.

Certainly that is it's main ostensible characteristic, but it is purely cosmetic one. It has not material difference from a game where that pretense is dropped and all abilities are given to a single character.

The "party" can only be controlled as a single character with multiple abilities. The party can never be split, it can never be in another square or place than all the other "party members" etc.

For all intents and purposes, the "party" is a single character in these so called "blobbers", so all games that exhibit the same characteristic must also be blobbers.

The term "blobber" is a poorly thought out and meaningless term. That's the long and short of it.

Dungeon Master played with one character = not a blobber.
Dungeon Master played with two or more = blobber

Dungeon Master is still the same exact game and plays exactly the same way, and yet it jumps between categories. How mysterious. It's like the definition is stupid.

What about Captive? There you are a single character, remotely controlling from one to five characters. But you're playing as the single character.

What kind of game is Captive?

 

[BlaineMono]

but it is purely cosmetic one. It has not material difference from a game where that pretense is dropped and all abilities are given to a single character

separate characters can be killed/muted/whatever separately tho

 

[Atlantico]

separate characters can be killed/muted/whatever separately tho

Certainly not out of the question that abilities can be muted/silenced/disabled separately as well.

Nobody thought this definition through. They just "lol blobber".

It's like the term itself manages to turn off people's brains. It's quite something.

"Lul gaiz it's like ur a blob, amirite?"
— "oh yah brah, totally! lul"

Nobody thought: wait, are we actually describing something specific or is this just a attempt at a banal joke that went way out of hand?

 

[Sigourn]

The "party" can only be controlled as a single character with multiple abilities.

This is wrong. It implies that at any given point, you can make use of all your characters' abilities. And it's wrong.
In Skyrim I can choose to use a spell, a weapon, stealth, etc. etc. at any point during combat. In a blobber, you are restricted to the character's abilities you currently can control. e.g. if you are controlled a Mage, don't expect to land a devastating hit with a sword. But in Skyrim you can do just that.

To say having one character killed in a blobber (say, a Mage) is the same as having your character silenced in Skyrim is simply retarded. I just won't bother with this discussion anymore because it's clear you know you are wrong, but don't want to accept it.

 

[BlaineMono]

Certainly not out of the question that abilities can be muted/silenced/disabled separately as well.

Wish I could disable your ability to post