# jRPGs; issues of laziness.



## Rydian (Nov 5, 2011)

Your standard jRPGS often seem unlikeable to western gamers that are used to playing western games, while gamers that have been playing jRPGs since the NES find nothing wrong with them... it's often hard for either side to say what exactly seems right or irks them, so this is an attempt of mine to find some of the points.

I'll just go into the main one, since most games revolve around combat...

Generic concept of "Hit Points" and combat.

Combat in most jRPGs is plainly unrealistic.  You're walking along in a dungeon, suddenly you go on a 2-second acid trip and then you're fighting enemies.  Turn-based or speed-based ("active" battle _my ass_, it's just that the frequency of your turns goes by your speed in most games with this setting), you and the enemy wail on each other, reducing some sort of number until you faint or die.  There's three main problems with this setup compared to the way most other games work.
The enemies show up out of nowhere in an otherwise-empty area.  The whole "random encounter" aspect, as it were... it's just lazy nowadays.  In the NES days yeah, the systems couldn't handle dungeons full of sprites with their own radius of detection to cause battles...

But hell, if the SNES can do it (Chrono Trigger for example), then a PS3 can damn well do it.  Games continue to have the random encounter system because it takes less effort, and they get away with it because it's what jRPG players are used to.


Most characters will just stand there and let you knife them in the face.  What is up with that?  "Well I just stabbed you in the chest, I guess it's your turn to stab me now so I'll stand still and let you do it."  This is almost a polar opposite to how many western games work, where a main focus is not getting hit in the first place.

There's many alternative combat types to counter this, though... and games have been dealing with them for years.  Even Tales Of Phantasia for the SNES had an alternative battle system, a live-moving side-on view.


Characters have this magical HP value that does nothing until it's reduced to 0, where it causes death/fainting.  This is an issue inherent to many games across the spectrum, but _it's most jarring in jRPGs_ because characters can seem to stand up to tons of incredible abuse (like having an elephant dropped on them), but then getting poked by a fluffy bunny causes instant death or something like that.

There have been plenty of games that use more realistic combat, but the down side to these games is that combat tends to be a lot riskier and troublesome.  Perhaps some middle ground could be reached to account for continued gameplay with the same character, but as usual the generic HP system is the easiest to implement so it's what most jRPGs stick to.


Now, there's a lot else that jRPGs do that _used_ to be done due to processing/storage limits (but is still done because it's shorter/cheaper/less work and they get away with it), but going into all of them would take too much time.

I mean I could write an entire article about overdesigned characters and their weapons.  Okay yeah Cloud from FF7 is supposed to have a unique weapon (it was custom-made for a _lot_ of money by the original owners), yet all the stores in the game seem to sell weapons like his, sometimes for pocket change, and you can't find normal swords?  Issues like this get into the issue of overdesigning characters putting limits on or otherwise altering the world while still keeping gameplay mechanics functional, and sometimes weird compromises have to be made that simply take believability away from the world.


----------



## prowler (Nov 5, 2011)

Final Fantasy XIII would like a word with you.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 5, 2011)

Not every game is meant to be realistic. Turn based battling, random encounters, etc are all gameplay elements that have been kept since the olden days because people enjoy them. Some people enjoy a game that doesn't have any of that, some people do.

I wouldn't really call them "lazy" or "issues".


----------



## Hop2089 (Nov 5, 2011)

Play Tales of games if you want real time RPGs. Eiyu Densetsu (The Legend of Heroes) series is great as well.


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 5, 2011)

You're basically just harping on "realism in mah vidyagaims maks em guud."
While a lot of bro-gamers will jack off to realism, it's not actually something a good portion of GAMERS actually care about. Since realism =/= fun.

HOWEVER the unintended point that turn based combat is complete shit and needs to go is certainly valid. The system works, and CAN be fun...but i'll be damned if most RPGs wouldn't be incredibly fun with an action combat system instead.

Final Fantasy drives me nuts though, especially FFXIII. They went SO far trying to make their "turn based" system more action oriented that they should just freakin' make it an action game and stop restricting their gameplay. All they really did was make an on-rails action RPG instead.


----------



## Hop2089 (Nov 5, 2011)

FF13 should have been like Tales of and had something similar to a LMBS for freer movement.


----------



## emigre (Nov 5, 2011)

FF13 shouldn't have even been made.


----------



## Augusta (Nov 5, 2011)

emigre said:


> FF13 shouldn't have even been made.



Take that back


----------



## prowler (Nov 5, 2011)

FFXIII is fine the way it is. People are just mad cus they didn't get a game they expected, it was too 'different'. Same goes for the PS2 FFs too.

With the points Rydian mentioned, I felt like it was a reasonable game to mention.

Haters are louder than the people that like it, I guess.


----------



## s4mid4re (Nov 5, 2011)

For one thing, I love turn-based combats and random encounters (I know it's weird). Random encounters aren't supposed to be realistic or w/e, it's the perfect system to make jrpgs fun (but tedious to some). The Hit-Point system can't really get any better either. This is fact, regardless of jrpg or not (as long as it involves defeating enemies/being defeated). Even fps games have set number of HP in which you die, once you've been severely damaged. It's not like one shot will automatically kill you; you're able to suppress some bullets, which is not so realistic, either. 

Not all jrpgs fit into that category. Megaman Battle Network series had a very unique system (and is one of my fav). Random encounters still apply, although I especially love them in this game. Your enemy and you are each given a 3*3 gridded area to move upon. Before each round begins, you're able to chose a maximum of 5 battle chips (equivalent to skills in other jrpgs) from a given number (ranging from 5-10 depending on customization to your megaman) of random chips out of the total number of battle chips in your folder (which is 30). Each battle chip has its own range and movement pattern, which makes timing and position very important before using them. Each battle chip is given certain letters (ranging from A-Z and asterisk); during each round, you can only chose one letter to use (i.e. if you have 3 chips with A and 2 chips with B, you can only chose either A or B for that round). Asterisk chips can be used with any letter you want. Choosing battle chips in certain order and combination can yield powerful combos, compared to when you chose them in a poor manner. You have to wait until a gauge fills up in order to chose a maximum of five more battle chips for the 2nd round.

Defeating enemies isn't all you want to do in this game either; depending on how you perform (no damage taken, defeated enemy fast, defeated many enemies at once, etc), you are given a rank for that battle. Depending on the rank, the amount of money or the quality/letter of battle chip you obtain changes. This makes random encounters fun to look forward.


----------



## wrettcaughn (Nov 5, 2011)

I don't think jRPGs do any of these things out of laziness.  There are plenty of people who play these games for exactly the same things you listed as negatives.  It's a genre.  It's kind of like saying reggae music is lazy because it uses such standard rhythms and cadences.  Well, people make reggae music because they like it and because the people who listen to it like it.  Companies are in the business of making games people like.  Whenever they break from that mold people bitch (see: FFXIII, Rage, LA Noire, every other game that didn't meet "everyone's expectations") so they continue to make the games people buy and play.  That goes for all genres though...  People bitch about CoD being the same game every year...yet they continue to buy it every year.  Then, when a game like Brink comes out that tries to mix it up some, it gets hate due to bugs or a learning curve.

That is why companies don't "innovate" anymore.  Not out of laziness, but because they really don't have to.


----------



## Taleweaver (Nov 5, 2011)

@OP: the points you list as negatives are reasons I tend to stay away from most jRPG's. You're supposed to be some "guy" who carries around more numbers than your average accountant. Those numbers are supposed to represent various stats, but it takes some imagination to actually UNDERSTAND what that stuff means. Mostly because, as you mention, only critical changes actually matter (HP being zero). And turn-based combat just isn't my cup of tea (I always get the impression the other guy is just lucky having a high random dice throw). Oh, and the armor system is usually ridiculously complicated. Up to the point of me being afraid wearing the wrong pants means some guy will score critical hits on my ass.

However, I know others just like it that way. My friend got me into giving fallout a chance. And indeed: this is almost a social game. There's nothing REALLY sneaking up on you. If you want, you can take fifteen minutes the time to hit back. In fact, the whole success of the genre could be because you can easily play these games while chatting on IRC or msn. Or even to real life friends, if you wanted to (I remember discussions of him, me and one or two other friends who were like "shoot him in the head!", "no, he's too far...the chances of missing are too big". "why don't you hit that guy instead? he's closer by!" and so on...you can't get that sort of things on FPS games  ). So...in the end, it's just what you consider fun.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 5, 2011)

Tl;dr version? 

I like jRPGs lol even if they are mediocre.


----------



## impizkit (Nov 5, 2011)

Shouldnt this be in blogs.


----------



## prowler (Nov 5, 2011)

impizkit said:


> Shouldnt this be in blogs.


No?


----------



## dills2 (Nov 5, 2011)

just cos u hate jrpgs dosent mean everyone else does


----------



## Necron (Nov 5, 2011)

Well, I have complained several times with my friends when we talk about that, but still I like the games. The idea is not to have realism, normal things most of the time are boring.

Don't know, but most games are not meant to be realistic. If that were the case, games shouldn't exist at all.


----------



## dills2 (Nov 5, 2011)

name one game that is completely realistic


----------



## prowler (Nov 5, 2011)

dills2 said:


> name one game that is completely realistic


Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 5, 2011)

dills2 said:


> name one game that is completely realistic



There are plenty of games that are incredibly realistic but it's impossible to make a game that's completely realistic.

He's just saying that JRPGs are highly unrealistic.


----------



## Zarcon (Nov 5, 2011)

Love it or hate it, it's a genre.
Though I absolutely hate random encounters and menu driven turn-based combat, there are plenty of people out there that like it.

It's not like JRPGs don't deviate either, outside of Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy most JRPGs try to do something different or unique, even if it's a minimal difference.

It'd be like complaining about FPS games because all of them involve pointing and shooting.
Or hating platformers because all of them involve running and jumping.
They're just doing what fits the genre. It just so happens that JRPGs tend to have random encounters and menu driven turn-based combat.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Nov 5, 2011)

prowler_ said:


> dills2 said:
> 
> 
> > name one game that is completely realistic
> ...


Because getting shot three times before dying and respawning after a few seconds is _completely_ realistic.


----------



## Erdnaxela (Nov 5, 2011)

Sooo, I like jRPG because I play game like that since snes?
I always loved jRPG, even "bad" one like FF X-2 or guardian crusade(psx), you always have 30+ hours of gameplay with them, sometime the story is good and can make you cry.
Most of them are hard, and you have 2 choices, grind or try until you win, and I was always proud of myself after defeating a difficult boss.

Well, you either like them or not, I'm a big fan of RPG, even game like samurai warrior 3, and I'll always love them.
Oh and, R.I.P. mother series, it was soo good.


----------



## Deleted-236924 (Nov 5, 2011)

Erdnaxela said:


> Sooo, I like jRPG because I play game like that since snes?
> I always loved jRPG, even "bad" one like FF X-2 or guardian crusade(psx), you always have 30+ hours of gameplay with them, sometime the story is good and can make you cry.
> Most of them are hard, and you have 2 choices, grind or try until you win, and I was always proud of myself after defeating a difficult boss.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't say Mother series were good, because that would imply they aren't anymore.


----------



## kiel379 (Nov 5, 2011)

LOL, I'm so glad people like you aren't in charge of...well anything, let alone game development. So what your saying is that link shouldn't have a health bar because it's not real enough or kazzoie shouldn't be inside a backpack as it would be against animal cruelty laws, fuckin idiot get a clue, look at tetris, it was and still is one of the most played games on the planet but I guess if it was up to you the shapes would fall at the same speed as dropping a real block and when you made a line you would have to call in a wrecking crew to demolish it. Silly ignorant person go and play real time train simulator if you want realism and leave this place


----------



## Sicklyboy (Nov 6, 2011)

While I normally agree with you, Rydian, I actually disagree with you on this.  Saying that makers of current day jrpg's do these things out of laziness is akin to saying that (thanks to seeing the new trailer for NSF:TR) devs for racing games don't add guns and walking free roam and paragliding... all due to laziness.  That isn't true - they don't add those things because that is the way it's been done, that's the way it IS done, and it's just plain unnecessary to add those things.

What I've never understood is what makes the difference between an rpg and a jrpg.  Why do I not know?  I've never bothered to look it up.  While I would be interested if someone were to explain it, I would lose no sleep and still find jsut as much meaning in my life if they didn't.


----------



## s4mid4re (Nov 6, 2011)

plasma dragon007 said:


> While I normally agree with you, Rydian, I actually disagree with you on this.  Saying that makers of current day jrpg's do these things out of laziness is akin to saying that (thanks to seeing the new trailer for NSF:TR) devs for racing games don't add guns and walking free roam and paragliding... all due to laziness.  That isn't true - they don't add those things because that is the way it's been done, that's the way it IS done, and it's just plain unnecessary to add those things.
> 
> *What I've never understood is what makes the difference between an rpg and a jrpg.  Why do I not know?  I've never bothered to look it up.  While I would be interested if someone were to explain it, I would lose no sleep and still find jsut as much meaning in my life if they didn't.*


It's just a difference of Japan vs. other countries (more info on wikipedia).

tl;dr jrpgs appeal more towards Japanese/weeaboos, while rpgs appeal more towards, uh... "hardcore gamers" I guess you'd call.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 6, 2011)

Lol guess that makes me a Weeaboo.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Nov 6, 2011)

So something like... SUper Robot Taisen OG Saga would be considered a jrpg, right?  Where as... hell, I don't even know what would be considered an rpg?


----------



## s4mid4re (Nov 6, 2011)

plasma dragon007 said:


> So something like... SUper Robot Taisen OG Saga would be considered a jrpg, right?  Where as... hell, I don't even know what would be considered an rpg?


Yeah, Super Robot Taisen would be a jrpg. I've never played it myself, but I think Mass Effect would be a game to be consider as a 'western rpg.'


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 6, 2011)

plasma dragon007 said:


> So something like... SUper Robot Taisen OG Saga would be considered a jrpg, right?  Where as... hell, I don't even know what would be considered an rpg?



This REALLY isn't a difficult concept.



Spoiler: the answer




While jRPG typically means an RPG made from a Japanese Dev team, it's more of a style these days. If you can't differentiate between Western and Japanese style RPGs, you're broken.

Japanese:
Tales Series
Final Fantasy Series
Shin Megami Tensei Series
Valkyria Chronicles Series

Western:
Fallout Series
Elder Scrolls Series
Mass Effect Trio
Dragon Age, er...games

Differences in gameplay and graphics aside, jRPGs tend to focus on a story. Not always of course, but it's more common. Western RPGs like...well, all of the above have these makeshift "choose your own adventure" stories, which typically work and can be fairly interesting, but can't hold up to a jRPG with a real story. They tend to be more lore and backstory driven than purely "here and now" story driven. They focus a lot more on exploration and gameplay.


----------



## air2004 (Nov 6, 2011)

Rydian said:


> The enemies show up out of nowhere in an otherwise-empty area.  The whole "random encounter" aspect, as it were... it's just lazy nowadays.  In the NES days yeah, the systems couldn't handle dungeons full of sprites with their own radius of detection to cause battles...
> 
> 
> But hell, if the SNES can do it (Chrono Trigger for example), then a PS3 can damn well do it.  Games continue to have the random encounter system because it takes less effort, and they get away with it because it's what jRPG players are used to.


I kinda miss that way of playing , I remeber when the switch over happend ( I loved chrono trigger , turn based forced you to think ) I think the game was called Secret of Mana , I hated the active battle system , but now I'm use to it .... so I cant go back :-(


----------



## Sicklyboy (Nov 6, 2011)

Hells Malice said:


> plasma dragon007 said:
> 
> 
> > So something like... SUper Robot Taisen OG Saga would be considered a jrpg, right?  Where as... hell, I don't even know what would be considered an rpg?
> ...



So Borderlands, Dead Island would fall into western RPG too?  And come to think about it, I suppose WoW would as well.  I just never considered those to be "true" rpg's, disregarding WoW, due to the fact that they are also FPSs, where as, it seems, most/all jrpg's are JUST rpgs.  I am sure I am overgeneralizing, but it seems then that most jrpgs are adventure games with turn based fighting elements altered by a customizable stat system.


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 6, 2011)

plasma dragon007 said:


> Hells Malice said:
> 
> 
> > plasma dragon007 said:
> ...



Well yes and no. Both Borderlands and Dead Island are more FPS than RPG...but yeah they'd classify as wRPG.
WoW is an MMORPG so it's a grey area.


----------



## BORTZ (Nov 6, 2011)

Woof in that case then im jRPGs all the way. I find wRPGs so bring and dry.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Nov 6, 2011)

Hells Malice said:


> Well yes and no. Both Borderlands and Dead Island are more FPS than RPG...but yeah they'd classify as wRPG.
> WoW is an MMORPG so it's a grey area.



Realized the way you worded that reply and it then made sense.

I do enjoy a lot of games, jrpg or wrpg alike, that have rpg elements to them.  But I think I prefer jrpgs over wrpgs, which seem to just get repetitive over time.

I have always referred to Pokemon as "My First Role Playing Game - The Game"


----------



## prowler (Nov 6, 2011)

s4mid4re said:


> tl;dr jrpgs appeal more towards Japanese/weeaboos, while rpgs appeal more towards, uh... "hardcore gamers" I guess you'd call.


No.
jRPGs and wRPGs both are very different from each other, it's a matter of taste if it appeals to you or not.

TL;DR just because it's a jRPG doesn't mean you're a weeaboo for playing it.





s4mid4re said:


> Yeah, Super Robot Taisen would be a jrpg. I've never played it myself, but I think Mass Effect would be a game to be consider as a 'western rpg.'


It is a wRPG because it's made by a non-Japanese company.


----------



## xist (Nov 6, 2011)

The only problems that's been mentioned that i have with jRPG's, aside from when the game itself is awful, is the dependence upon random encounters (and from this topic it doesn't seem that i'm alone!) and mandatory grind solely for powering up levels. In this day and age every RPG should utilise a system akin to Persona 3 - onscreen enemies which will even flee from you if you're too powerful for them. Not only would it make progression through a world map/dungeon more pleasant but you'd only get into combat that was worth your time. RPG's, supposedly the most reliant on story, seem to forget that their reality is broken somewhat when walking across an empty field manages to involve fighting several groups of invisible enemies. Would every one of those groups have tip-toed up behind you? No. The only other way to go that would be more tolerable than the limitless Random Encounter system would be what Ar Tonelico did.... a gauge which counted down after every battle in an area, which once it hit zero indicated no more battles (the gauge would decrease more rapidly in different areas). It wasn't perfect but if you got lost at least you didn't want to restart to avoid tedious battles. Random encounters haven't been necessary since the SNES....it's the fear of change that keeps them in RPG's, both of the dev's and gamers themselves.

Mandatory Grind is just bad game design....if i've not fled from any battles, and taken the expected route through the story (i.e. not a rapid rush through it), then i don't expect to have to level up for an hour to take out a boss. If you have to grind and it's not fun, then it ruins the game completely.

My favourite game genre is jRPG, but when even i start thinking enough is enough then the insistence of lazy mechanics seems an act of stupidity.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 6, 2011)

Hells Malice said:


> Japanese:
> Tales Series
> Final Fantasy Series
> Shin Megami Tensei Series
> ...



Fixed 

Also, JRPGs appeal to Japanese people? Color me shocked! It's not like it's called a *Japanese* RPG. But gaming generally has no boundaries, and I've been known to enjoy a bit of a cheesy JRPG now and then.


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 6, 2011)

That's a terrible fix.
I'd take cliche over boring, dry, bland with 2 dimensional character designs.
I dunno what it is about wRPGs but character development just is NOT in their vocabulary.


----------



## Rydian (Nov 6, 2011)

Guys, you have the point wrong...  just because I'm listing complaints doesn't mean I don't like them.  Some jRPGs are among my favorite games (Mother series, Tales series, Secret Of Mana, Final Fantasy 5/6/8) this includes older games that did many of the things I'm listing... 'cause I'm one of the people that doesn't mind it.  Again, I'm not saying, all jRPGs did this, _in fact I listed some jRPGs that did not follow the norm_.

I was listing _points that jRPG haters will often find irritating compared to the western games they normally play_, since many of them seem unable point them out.

However, I have to stress that many of these systems _are_ done for laziness.  I have made (comparably tiny) games for years, I have read interviews with game designers for years, I have looked into the ROM hacking and resource-grabbing scene for years, hell, I've been emulating/playing games for ages (mostly every single day because I was a lot more socially awkward when I was young so I just played games a lot), and _I have seen many, many games that take various approaches to situations_.  The most common approaches in jRPGs (such as I listed) are done because some of the better ones take longer times and more effort.

Chrono Trigger's method of enemy encounters requires placing specific event instances throughout the map, each with their own detection shape, direction, radius, and width/angle, then giving each one it's own enemy group, assigning each group it's own animation for when the battle starts, and then test-playing it multiple times to make sure the player can't sneak past the detection spots for _all_ the enemies.

Earthbound's method of enemy encounters involves laying out specific event areas that will cause enemies off-screen to spawn (recent TAS videos have found and exploited this), and (assuming the AP wasn't set off) setting each spawn to a min/max number of enemies (in order to avoid slowdown, which happened anyways), and then giving each enemy it's own walking/aggro AI (see bats versus moles versus fobbies), then setting the various other enemies that show up in the same areas to either path towards the player or deactivate (depending on species) when the player encounters another enemy, to add to the enemy formation faced when the battle starts.

Your standard fallback jRPG random encounter system requires marking off an area and setting enemies to show up in it after a random number of steps (or on a certain RNG result per step).  Done, it's functional.

I could list all sorts of things like that, but I mainly wanted to show that people who dislike jRPGs aren't doing so for no reason.
EDIT: And it's not like tvtropes doesn't list this kind of stuff for a living anyways.


----------



## ojsinnerz. (Nov 6, 2011)

Typical JRPG: Linear game design, ugly graphics, poor combat, horrid writing, forgettable characters, and recycled content from start still the end.
Typical WRPG: Open world, Challenging, well designed, mesmerizing graphics, emphasis on exploring, well crafted dark fantasy world, and memorable characters.


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 6, 2011)

ojsinnerz. said:


> Typical JRPG: Linear game design, ugly graphics, poor combat, horrid writing, forgettable characters, and recycled content from start still the end.
> Typical WRPG: Open world, Challenging, well designed, mesmerizing graphics, emphasis on exploring, well crafted dark fantasy world, and memorable characters.


Um... What? You cannot be serious

Dragon age is an North AMERICA game,It was made in Canada. Dark souls is 100% Japanese


----------



## prowler (Nov 6, 2011)

brandonspikes said:


> Um... What? You cannot be serious
> 
> Dragon age is an North AMERICA game,It was made in Canada. Dark souls is 100% Japanese


That's the joke.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 6, 2011)

ojsinnerz. said:


> Typical JRPG: Linear game design, ugly graphics, poor combat, horrid writing, forgettable characters, and recycled content from start still the end.
> Typical WRPG: Open world, Challenging, well designed, mesmerizing graphics, emphasis on exploring, well crafted dark fantasy world, and memorable characters.



Took me a while, but I get it. I lol'd pretty hard.

As for "WRPGs have no character development", it depends on the WRPG. Look at Bethesda WRPGs (Fallout 3, New Vegas, ESIV: Oblivion, and probably Skyrim) and you're pretty dead ringer. It's more focused on exploration and open environments than characters. BioWare RPGs (Mass Effect and its sequel, Dragon Age Origins, not so much DA2) and they're heavy on the character development, although BioWare is a bit notorious for recycling their characters. Every game basically has Carth 2.0, generic male love interest, generic female love interest, broody emo character with dark past, warrior with honor, and so on. Not to say they're not good, but they're recycled (although JRPGs are also a bit notorious for essentially recycling character traits). They also have some decent openness and generally good RPG elements.

But of course you don't like Mass Effect and think Crisis Core is better so you kinda just have a shit taste in western games, or no taste in western games.


----------



## Hells Malice (Nov 6, 2011)

I like Mass Effect when I can't get to sleep.
10 minutes of it trying to be compelling and interesting puts me right to sleep.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Nov 6, 2011)

Hells Malice said:


> I like Mass Effect when I can't get to sleep.
> 10 minutes of it trying to be compelling and interesting puts me right to sleep.



Sounds just like any Tales of game to me.

Bah dum tish...?


----------



## Deleted User (Nov 7, 2011)

prowler_ said:


> brandonspikes said:
> 
> 
> > Um... What? You cannot be serious
> ...


It's hard to read people you dont know over the internet. There are a lot of stupid people on the internet, so its hard to tell if people are joking or being dumb.


----------

