View Single Post

Thread: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

  1. - Top - End - #391
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: OOTS #860 - The Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    I have stated that both your game desires and mine can be good game design. You have stated that what matters to me is atrocious game design.
    Let's be fair you were the one who started the game design prescriptivism, when you said ranges for real weapons should be looked up, not made up. That's a flat statement about how games should be designed, and it's not really compatible with a "different strokes for different folks" attitude.

    You also said, "If somebody wrote a game in which swords were used to wash dishes, longbows were used to clean floors, and dishcloths were weapons with 500 foot range, most people would consider that bad design, and would have less fun trying to understand the absurd rules," which sounds a lot like a reductio ad absurdum "lack of realism leads to bad game design" argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay R View Post
    I still believe that your goals should matter, and I will never state that designers designing games to please you is "atrocious game design."
    The two quotes above make it sound a lot like you were calling games without an emphasis on realism bad, if not atrocious. If you actually intended to say that some people enjoy realism in games and some don't, and there's room in the market for both to play the kinds of games they like, I don't think anyone would argue.
    Last edited by jere7my; 2012-08-12 at 12:34 AM.