Topic: Will indie gaming will take over FPS&casual gaming fad for good

[X]

I did, lol. I have a habit of making nick-usernames of sorts. I guess I kinda forgot there were two Xs here. :X

*Chuckle* 

[ROCKMAN X]

was a joke on how you were only ever really bringing up AAA shooters and casual games.

Yes the market is bloody saturated with shooters! what are the games are the most popular? Halo,Destiny,Bioshock,Killzone,mass effect,call of duty,battlefield,gears of war,borderlands,team fortress,titanfall.. not only is FPS genre creatively bankrupt its insane popularity also affects other genres mainly action adventure,Stealth and Survival horror.

I don't want to sound like an old grump but back in 'My days" i used to hear about different types of games now it seems like only thing that trends is shooters and GTA clones,diversity my ass!

You're kinda doing the same thing to the non-indie market.

Not really.. there just aren't any new modern games that have any creativity or diversity the market is saturated with mediocre overhyped games like assassins creed and  shooters and beneath the pile of shit you'll find some dark souls or portal but that's it! most of the modern gaming is just SHIT a big pile of shit i have to wade through this mediocrity to play one decent game which doesn't make me puke.

I don't consider Mighty No. 9 super unique for these reasons:

I consider mighty 9 unique for 1 reason alone  there's no damn game in the market which looks like mighty 9 AKA NO MEGAMAN LEGENDS 3 and btw explodemon looks like  Megaman X and mighty 9 is made by the creator of megaman.

Shantae, though, while having a lot of cool uses for its stuff, doesn't seem too innovative.

Again what was the last sprite based game you've played on non-handhelds? and besides its adding to diversity to the market so i'll take what i can get.

Both of their newest releases (Absolution and Blacklist) play just like updated versions of their previous games.

NO both of them played like neutered versions of their former selves oversimplified and streamlined to cater toward the COD audience anyone who has played blood money to their heart knows how much of shit absolution is,anyone who has played chaos theory to their heart knows blacklist sucks.

Ys: The Oath in Felghana is also on PSP

No one gives a damn about psp Ys might as well be on a calculator and it wouldn't make much of a difference is Ys series as popular as Skyrim? no obviously not its a niche game for niche audience and that's how hitman,tomb raider,resident evil were all before they went mainstream casual pandering.

Also, what does them being only on PC have to do with anything?

Well it does have to do with modern gaming.. ys origin is a really old game.

I also have to point out that the only time Resident Evil was ever really diverse was RE4.

WTF!? i was talking about diversity in gaming MARKET not in games itself.

Take for example shadow of modor which looks&plays EXACTLY like Assassins creed&batman arkham series this is where diversity is needed.

Alone in the Dark, Last Alert, Dino Crisis, Carrier, Vampire Hunter D (though it more resembles Onimusha), Fear Effect, Parasite Eve 2, etc. Most "RE clones"

Parasite eve is an action RPG not a survival horror game,fear effect is a colorful action-adventure game.. i don't how they are "RE-clones" they're not even close.

Alone in the dark is also a unique survival horror game really unappreciated but resident evil obviously went down the gutter after RE4.

[Shiroi Koumori]

I think the answer you are looking for is this:

Why are there shitty games?
Simple, because of this.


Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.

Take for example Assassins Creed: The Innovators and Early adopters loved the first few games and posted about those on social media. Here comes the bandwagon effect with loads of marketing from UBIsoft (they are getting bolder each year with gimmicks) with the majority clamoring to buy and need/want more of these games. Other companies see the winning formula and they too follow the style of the said game and of course to make it appealing to the late majority, those games have to be easy. Now multiply this effect with other games like those FPS and casual games. They will not vanish due to the intense demand but they might branch out to other media, see Angry Birds and Assassin's Creed.

Now to answer your main question:
Indie games as of now are just appealing to the Innovators and Early adapters, only time will tell if they will go and affect the early majority. And eventually, if they got over the curve, then you might start criticizing them for becoming too mainstream. But if the demand for FPS and casual gaming is still strong by that time, that former indie game would just sit happily alongside the FPS, casuals and parkour simulations.

[ROCKMAN X]

Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.

But if you grew up on PS1/PS2 era you'd realize much of these "modern games" are just rehashes of older games and there's little to no variety at all... and older diverse games have simply been shunted to the indie scene while shooters&hollywood movie games are selling millions,God i feel sorry for kids nowadays.

then you might start criticizing them for becoming too mainstream.

I'm not a hipster idiot as long as they don't "sell out" and milk their franchises with  rushed sequels after sequels i'm cool with it.. after all wasn't PS2 generation "Mainstream" too? there's a whole lot of variety in its library... whereas in 7th gen market is saturated with complete and utter shit.

You know casuals always existed.. its just the bloody wii and call of duty's insane cross-plat success which completely mutated the industry into the monster it is today.

[Belmontoya]

I think the gaming industry is great these days.

We have pretty huge markets for almost every genre of game.

I don't see fads, I see great games of all kinds making waves.

The big budget fps games are great when you're in the mood for them. Just look at Destiny and Planetside 2. If you think those are the only types of games doing well on a massive scale, then you are blind.

The only reason there are more bad games now days is because the market has become insanely saturated. That's not bad thing. It's a lot like the music industry. You just have sift through a little more to find the stuff you like. I would rather have too many options than not enough.

I just don't think that it's anything to complain about. Everything is great these days IMO.

[theANdROId]

I think the answer you are looking for is this:

Why are there shitty games?
Simple, because of this.


Innovators: Explore what's new.
Early Adopters: Seek the leading edge.
Early Majority: Prefer the market leader.
Late Majority: Want 'cheap and easy'.
Laggards: Avoid innovations and resist change.
...

Sounds like someone has been watching this!
Game Theory: Flappy Bird, PewDiePie, and Pasta Sauce


...or, you're just intelligent and did your own research. :-)

[Dracula9]

You say you're not a hipster, but your argument presents a different rationale.

You've kind of been going in circles now, Rockman, no offense intended. Shiroi basically just answered your original question in as clear a way as one could, and yet you're still throwing the "all modern games are remake and rehashes and the old games were the best," when really...neither of those are 100% true.

Sure, a ton of modern games rely on time-tested formulas (i.e. the 'shooter-craze' probably wouldn't have happened if not for gems like Quake, Doom, and Wolfenstein), but that's the be expected. If I'm the CEO of a gaming company and I want to make the next big thing, it's just flat-out easier and safer economically to use a style that's sold well in the past and mold it however I think will best sell the product.

It's not ideal when you think about it, but Shiroi's chart explains it. These major companies and games don't really HAVE to be innovative or original at this point. They might have been when they were new, but games like CoD have made so much money and have built such a profitable reputation for themselves that, really, they CAN rehash the same shit over and over and not have to worry. They can afford to take one CoD game, change the characters and environment (usually just to a different part of the desert, hue), add/remove a few guns, and get a new game out of it because it's going to sell regardless. They put themselves where they are (well their fans did technically bu that isn't my point) and have become fat and content to loaf about in complacency, because there's no danger there.

Likewise, the indie market isn't as good as you've been claiming. Do you have any idea just how many indie games flat-out fucking suck? The shooter craze you keep referring to hasn't got jack or shit on the retro craze. Now anybody can make a tiny sprite, upscale it by three, put in half-assed chiptunes in a half-assed engine, and expect to make millions. Flappy Bird is all I need to point to on this one. It's rarer than you would think for a person or group to put the time and effort into making a quality product, and when that does happen that game usually dominates the indie market single-handedly for a while (Shovel Knight, need I say more?). And I'm not knocking on the indie developers (well a little bit but for good reason), as they're still making a passion project on their own time, but I think there are a lot of people out there who think just because it's indie and it does X or Y retro gimmick that's been done to death already, it's gonna make them rich. But they get points for trying IMO.

As for rehashing game styles/elements...I'm just gonna point to the TRUE console wars of the 90s and all the parody and copycat games that arose from that. Rehashes were around just as much in your self-proclaimed "golden period," Rockman, if not moreso than today.

Soooo, the impression I've gotten over the course of this thread is that you don't like modern gaming and think indie games are better, therefore nobody can like the modern marker and everybody must agree that indie devving is the way to go. There are pros and cons to both sides, neither is better than the other in the grand scheme. You're entitled to your own opinion just as we all are. But please don't keep pushing biased arguments on us when they've already been answered.

And if I'm way out in left field and painfully wrong on any of this shit, feel free to knock me on my ass. Internet =/= tone, I'm just going by what I'm getting from all this.


EDIT: I'm gonna let rip on this one real quick, just because it really pisses me off on principle.

But if you grew up on PS1/PS2 era you'd realize much of these "modern games" are just rehashes of older games and there's little to no variety at all... and older diverse games have simply been shunted to the indie scene while shooters&hollywood movie games are selling millions,God i feel sorry for kids nowadays.

I did grow up in the PSX/PS2 era (I mean I still had a lot of the old consoles but I wasn't around/old enough for their heyday). I don't "realize" anything but that there are more choices for gamers nowadays than there were when I was a kid, and I'm sure the members on the sit who WERE around for the pre-PSX eras had even less choice (not that Pong or Pitfall was ever a bad thing). I "realize" that there are more console and platform options available at extremely reasonable pricing - compared to some of the older consoles - for what they are capable of than I would have ever expected as a kid. I "realize" that now people can go and make their own games and dreams come true, instead of sitting around waiting for the next one to come out. You just didn't HAVE an indie market in, like, the Atari/Commodore/Intellivision days. And for all of those reasons, I certainly don't "feel sorry for kids nowadays." Just because they might be fans of something I don't particularly like doesn't give me any reason to ignore the near-countless options they have to them that I did not. That's a wonderful thing.

And one more thing I've "realized." I "realize" that there will always be snotty guys who think their opinion is the word of gamer God, and will put words in people's mouths (i.e. if you grew up in the same era as me you obviously must feel exactly the same thing i do) when they have no solid argument to fall back on.

Hint, hint.

[Claimh Solais]

Now, I dropped out of this thread but I've been keeping up with it. Dracula9, you've said everything. I love you.

[Shiroi Koumori]

@Android: I already knew about the chart during college (10 years ago, gosh, I'm old....) and yeah I also watched MatPat's show and laughed because I got what he was saying. Going off tangent, I love his channel!

@Dracula9: Thanks so much dearie, I don't have to defend my side anymore. 

[Dracula9]

You're quite welcome, madam.

[ROCKMAN X]

Shiroi basically just answered your original question in as clear a way as one could, and yet you're still throwing the "all modern games are remake and rehashes and the old games were the best," when really...neither of those are 100% true.

I never said "All games are remakes and rehases" its just a good bulk of them are... 7th gen consoles had the least amount of diversity and new groundbreaking IP's.

the 'shooter-craze' probably wouldn't have happened if not for gems like Quake, Doom, and Wolfenstein

I'm not talking about that 90's PC gaming FPS craze which died out in mid 2000's i'm talking about the shooter craze that almost completely changed the gaming industry AKA halo&Call of duty.. you can see their game design influence in almost every 7th gen game.

it's just flat-out easier and safer economically to use a style that's sold well in the past and mold it however I think will best sell the product.

Well they did that in the past too right? why are they now becoming ever so formulaic&pragmatic? are these big-bad billionaire companies afraid to lose money or something?

Do you have any idea just how many indie games flat-out fucking suck?

Yes yes and yes! most of it is bullshit 8 bit nonsense and shitty overrated games like amnesia but i can ignore it all because there are lots of indie and non-AAA games that i can actually look forward to! i can't say the same for AAA mainstream gaming.

AAA gaming is just repeating the same trend  of the last gen.. same shooter oriented,Hollywood-esque bullshit.

So yeah if AAA gaming is like a rotten fish then indie gaming is probably the moldy bread i would like to savor.

The shooter craze you keep referring to hasn't got jack or shit on the retro craze.

just go to any video game website and at the front page what do you see? destiny,titanfall,killzone call of duty or some shit like that.. that alone proves which "Craze" dominates mainstream game market.

Flappy Bird is all I need to point to on this one.

And that's casual gaming.. they're precisely what's wrong with gaming industry people who want easy,accessible,dumbed-down games... it doesn't make a difference if its call of duty or flappy bird the formula is the same.

Rehashes were around just as much in your self-proclaimed "golden period," Rockman, if not moreso than today.

Nah.. i was referring to the PS1&PS2 era in that library there was so much diversity and no one type of genre actually had any monopoly over gaming like nowadays.

But please don't keep pushing biased arguments on us when they've already been answered.

Hey watch what you're saying! your argument is biased to me! you don't wanna accept that 7th gen had a genuine lack of diversity especially compared to the older generations.

but that there are more choices for gamers nowadays than there were when I was a kid

That doesn't necessarily mean newer games are on par with the older ones sure you have indie,nds,Wii,steam,PSN,XBLA and tons of HD-re releases but when you honestly evaluate exclusive 7th gen library you'll "Realize" how much lacking it really is.

FPS shooters used to be massive in the old days nowadays its so awfully linear&scripted.. so what good are those fancy cinematics&graphics when the actual game design is so regressive?

I certainly don't "feel sorry for kids nowadays."

geez i'm not talking about the DARK AGES of gaming..i'm talking about when gaming was really fun *hint* *hint* 5th and 6th gen.

And one more thing I've "realized." I "realize" that there will always be snotty guys who think their opinion is the word of gamer God, and will put words in people's mouths (i.e. if you grew up in the same era as me you obviously must feel exactly the same thing i do) when they have no solid argument to fall back on.
Hint, hint.

I love your condescending attitude,is that a side-effect of being a CEO?

[Shiroi Koumori]

Saw the PS games sales chart.
I can't help but say: I see you have this hatred for the massive influx of action games in this generation and yet you are complaining on a fan forum that celebrates an action game.
Based on the chart, I see that people nowadays apparently love the action genre and all its "mediocrity", just deal with it, besides if you hate it so much... Vote for your choice with the power of your purse (I know you do). But always remember, other people also have that right.
Besides, companies don't want to lose money, it is just not practical from a business stand point, duh. Especially nowadays when they have to compete with other forms of entertainment which are also entering the video game industry, aside from the fact that everything is getting more expensive and salaries are not rising as fast as inflation...

[Belmontoya]

Refinement and innovation are both valuable.

I've been gaming since the 80's. I feel that the 16 bit era was the best, but I don't get all hung up about it. I love what is out there now.

This is a great time that we are in with gaming and you should take the time to really appreciate that instead of complaining about a small fraction of games, that may get a lot of attention, but are most certainly not the majority of what is out there.

I would agree with Dracula 9 that you shouldn't push biased arguments if you had an argument to begin with. This seems like aimless anger.

If you don't like what the mainstream consoles offer than try an Ouya or something. But most importantly, you need to relax.

[Dracula9]

Condescending, am I? This coming from someone who refuses to admit when he's wrong and instead compensates by twisting his already-failing argument in on itself further. Well, I'd rather be condescending than willfully ignorant.

*cracks knuckles*

I had a good giggle there, mate. I tried the nice approach, now I'm gonna change gears since that didn't work (this probably won't either but I'm gonna have too much fun to pass it up).

I never said "All games are remakes and rehases" its just a good bulk of them are... 7th gen consoles had the least amount of diversity and new groundbreaking IP's.

You pretty strongly implied it. By generalizing that "a good bulk of them are" and only listing off console gens rather than providing more than a few generic and obvious examples to back up your argument very heavily suggests that you meant all modern games. You don't seem to understand that you're on a board with a large number of people, many of whom love a good debate, and as such are used to arguments following some form of structure. Yours does not, you've basically just been throwing a tantrum because the rest of the gaming industry doesn't agree with you - and having the audacity to suggest that they should - and then lashing out at anyone who contradicts that.

Don't fucking generalize unless you know how to; you don't.

I'm not talking about that 90's PC gaming FPS craze which died out in mid 2000's i'm talking about the shooter craze that almost completely changed the gaming industry AKA halo&Call of duty.. you can see their game design influence in almost every 7th gen game.

I don't really care what gen you were talking about. You didn't specify - hello, generalizing - so I assumed based on your lack of information that you meant the shooter genre as a whole. As such, I pointed out that almost all shooter games that have survived into mass popularity today were in many ways derivative of the FPS classics like the ones I mentioned. Halo and Call of Duty might have influenced many games already, but I'd be willing to bet money that they were inspired by other shooters before them, and those shooters were probably inspired by the Doom-Quake era. It's called the domino effect, ROCKMAN, and it applies in all genre pieces of all kinds. If something is innovative and successful for its time, it's going to be dissected and studied and rehashed and reinvented and reused in future installments and generations. You don't fix what isn't broken, you figure out why it isn't broken and apply that to new stuff.

Well they did that in the past too right? why are they now becoming ever so formulaic&pragmatic? are these big-bad billionaire companies afraid to lose money or something?

Because formalizing and serializing games to essentially mass-produce a genre fad saves them money. Those big-bad billionaire companies aren't going to invest in a six-year project unless they know the end payout is going to break even and profit from that six-year investment. Changing a few elements and rereleasing something is cheaper and they know it makes them money. Again, don't fix what isn't broken. And another reason they're not investing as much money into bigger projects is simply that there IS no money to invest. There are recessions and market influxes and inflation in salaries and beyond to worry about, and you don't seem to be grasping that. The bigger picture seems to be eluding you continually. You don't honestly believe that gaming CEOs just sit around counting their money and looking down on the street and laughing at the buyers, do you? Not every CEO's like Steve Jobs.

Yes yes and yes! most of it is bullshit 8 bit nonsense and shitty overrated games like amnesia but i can ignore it all because there are lots of indie and non-AAA games that i can actually look forward to! i can't say the same for AAA mainstream gaming.

AAA gaming is just repeating the same trend  of the last gen.. same shooter oriented,Hollywood-esque bullshit.

So yeah if AAA gaming is like a rotten fish then indie gaming is probably the moldy bread i would like to savor.

I'm glad we can agree on something, even though our reasons for agreeing aren't even close. Again, you seemed to have missed my point entirely. I wasn't bringing up the indie scene to rip on it so much as I was to point out that your original argument applies to more than just the modern, non-indie market. Which you didn't seem to get. Again.

just go to any video game website and at the front page what do you see? destiny,titanfall,killzone call of duty or some shit like that.. that alone proves which "Craze" dominates mainstream game market.

One, sales figures have absolutely nothing to do with my point whatsoever. Missing the point seems to be your own little craze.

Two, Destiny looks great. I plan on getting it. Titanfall is actually a lot of fun, and that's coming from a guy who doesn't really like FPS games that much. Killzone I've enjoyed but I don't think I'd spend money on it. CoD I just flat-out don't like, but I don't need to try and bring it or its fandom down to justify it. I don't like it. That doesn't mean it's bad, it doesn't mean it needs to die out, and it doesn't mean those millions of fans are wrong. It means I don't like it. It's not my place or right to tell other people what to think because they disagree with me on something. They like it, I don't, it's that fucking simple. You might want to reread that a few times and let it sink in, as that's my biggest point of contention against you and your argument. Learn to dislike something without making it into a giant fucking flame war, just so you feel good about your decision.

And that's casual gaming.. they're precisely what's wrong with gaming industry people who want easy,accessible,dumbed-down games... it doesn't make a difference if its call of duty or flappy bird the formula is the same.

Again, missing the point. And really? Tapping a screen to stop a colorful bird from crashing into a pipe is the same formula as a military story about war and regimes and factional conflicts?

Surely you're not as dense as you appear to be.

Nah.. i was referring to the PS1&PS2 era in that library there was so much diversity and no one type of genre actually had any monopoly over gaming like nowadays.

Oh, of course. The God of War games didn't dominate the market for months at a time (which, by the way, copied in a sense the Orb system seen in Devil May Cry, which AFAIK was the first game to use it (if there's an earlier one, please inform me), so there's a rehash of a formula you conveniently forgot to mention), Metal Gear Solid 3 didn't make fans the world over laugh and cry and spend hours unlocking secrets and be haunted by the ending for however long. The Persona and Final Fantasies on those consoles didn't take shit over for awhile, oh no. Hell, the JRPGs were a very large portion of the PS/PS2 era; I don't know percentages, but I can think of more JRPGs on those systems than I can any other genre (and I grew up with those two, so that's saying something). But you're totally correct. Every genre sold equally across the board on the PSX and PS2. That IS what you're saying, right? Forgive me if I've misinterpreted, you're generalizing and not providing solid examples again.

Hey watch what you're saying! your argument is biased to me! you don't wanna accept that 7th gen had a genuine lack of diversity especially compared to the older generations.

"Watch what I'm saying?" Seriously? You've thrown everyone else's argument under the bus because you couldn't handle that they were right and you were wrong, you brush off every good point made against you, you call out genres you so clearly have invested no time into (which really makes your opinion rather unfair), you bring up pointless charts and figures in arguments they have no bearing on, and you have the conceit to tell ME to watch what I say?

You're fucking unbelievable, you know that? If I'm being honest (which should be obvious I have been), this self-righteous, willful ignorance is easily the most infuriating thing about your argument. By comparison I don't even give a shit about the technicalities of it. This shit needs to stop. Seriously. The rest of us are taking the time to research what we need to and really making an effort to bring forth an argument as fairly as we're able, and here you are throwing up sales figures - which as far as I know you could've just pulled off of Google with no other research into it - and disregarding all that work the rest of us have made. I'd ask you if you have any idea how fucking disrespectful that is if I didn't already know the answer.

And of course my argument is biased, you idiot. Every argument is biased. That wasn't what I was bloody saying. My argument has its bias, yes, but I'm doing my best to present my argument while also considering the other side of it, thus bringing forth points which account for both halves of the issue and expanding my insights of it by proxy. That's called a debate, something you clearly aren't skilled in.

But I'm not forcing my opinions down everyone else's throat as though I'm entitled to do so, like you are (I am now, in a sense, but this is a reactionary response).

That doesn't necessarily mean newer games are on par with the older ones sure you have indie,nds,Wii,steam,PSN,XBLA and tons of HD-re releases but when you honestly evaluate exclusive 7th gen library you'll "Realize" how much lacking it really is.

FPS shooters used to be massive in the old days nowadays its so awfully linear&scripted.. so what good are those fancy cinematics&graphics when the actual game design is so regressive?

YOU'RE MISSING THE GODDAMNED POINT AND THE GODDAMNED BIGGER PICTURE HOW MANY TIMES TO I HAVE TO SAY IT GAWD

geez i'm not talking about the DARK AGES of gaming..i'm talking about when gaming was really fun *hint* *hint* 5th and 6th gen.

Yes, because you are the sole force which can say for absolute certain which things are fun and which ones are not. Because you so clearly are correct where the other seven billion people on the planet are wrong. Because your rights as an individual somehow equates higher than the individual opinions and rights of the rest of us. You arrogant prick, just shut the fuck up with that spiel already. It's not your place to dictate what eras were better than others. Having an opinion is fine. But you're doing that thing again where you're basically disregarding everyone else's that conflicts with yours.

I love your condescending attitude,is that a side-effect of being a CEO?

If I'm being condescending, you appear to be the only one who thinks so. Can you not grasp the finer aspects of a rational and logical argument? That's what I posted. If you got butthurt that I called you out on your bullshit, I'm so very sorry, but I only did what you've been doing this entire thread. Except, I have the decency to forego passive-aggressive bullshit and call you out directly.

And really? You think I'm a gaming CEO? Joke or not, that's fucking hilarious.

No, I'm not a CEO. I'm a twenty-year-old indie developer/spriter/musician doing night audits at a hotel so I can save enough money to finally move out of my folks' house so that I can get my life started and they can get on with theirs. I'm flattered that you think I'm a CEO. I certainly do hope I could get there one day. But seeing as I haven't released anything yet, how you reached that conclusion is beyond my understanding.

SO IN CONCLUSION TO THIS INHUMANELY LONG POST, ROCKMAN X:

Stop being a prick. We're all entitled to our opinions, but that doesn't make mine more right than your or yours more right than mine. It's not my place to tell people what to think and it's not yours either. Learn how to actually argue before you throw down the gauntlet with people that do, otherwise you're going to get publicly curb-stomped, and depending on who you piss off, even more heavily than what I just did.

You're really beginning to piss me off, and I'm sure you've rustled a few other people's jimmies too. So I suggest you stop making bogus claims that have no bearing on reality or the argument, because while you're entitled to your own opinion, I'm just as entitled to knock you on your ass when you start preaching it like it's the word of god.

*exhales*

[JR]

Basically, what I'm trying to say is, no. Indie and non-indie games will pretty much co-exist from here on, since both are just as good and bad as the other.

Pretty much sums it up. This isn't the Highlander. There can be more than one.