Computers beat up my role player - Page 20
Page 20 of 57 FirstFirst ... 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 564
  1. #191
    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    Assertions of facts are not opinions; that is, they can be correct or incorrect. An incorrect assertion of fact is a factual error. What you quoted are two separate statements. The first, that our difference on this matter is not philosophical, but factual. That is, philosophy has nothing to do with our disagreement. Our disagreement is whether video game "RPGs" are actually role-playing games (and in turn should be considered as part of the RPG market, number-wise). This is a question of fact. We have conflicting assertions of fact, not statements of philosophical outlook. That is what I mean by factual, not philosophical.
    Except that the qualities that define a "roleplaying game" are open to interpretation. We aren't dealing with chemical formulae or mathematical equations. God didn't scribe the true definition of a roleplaying game and hand it to Moses. Jesus didn't explain to us what a roleplaying game was in the Sermon on the Mount. There are differing opinions with different starting points and assumptions.

    So, yes, this is a philosophical discussion.

    You are not going to "prove" in any realistic or believeable sense that a video game cannot be a roleplaying game, especially given that there are people here who have roleplayed in video games, and say so.

    And, I'm willing to be money that you are not going to be convinced that a video game can be a roleplaying game.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    The second statement you quoted is related to the first. Belief has nothing to do with what we are disagreeing about. Our disagreement is on what the fact of the matter is.
    No, our apparent difference is that I am content to call my opinion what it is: an opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    It is encouraging that you understand this.
    Ah yes, the glorious height of Enworld dialogue: the shin-kicking under the table.

    Stop dancing, and ante up. Or admit that you can't back up the "facts" you assert.

    It's just that simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    We have equal burdens of proof because your assertion is one that turns upon fact, not opinion of that fact. I admit that I have not cited criteria that differentiates video game "RPGs" from actual RPGs (though most anyone with knowledge of both industries should easily see the distinction, in my opinion); this too is a factual assertion that may be proved or disproved. It is not a matter of opinion.
    And, of course, your opinion simply reflects the facts you fail to demonstrate. Yes, we've covered this ground rather thoroughly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    I disagree, and do question it (though this is a factual matter that can be proven or disproved . . . I may be wrong); once again, the OGL is premised upon the demonstrated fact that D&D is the market leader and that any growth in the market adds to the market leader's share. Because of this, using D&D's number of players gives a pretty accurate view of the number of players of role-playing games in general.
    Again, you are very good at bald assertions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    I notice how you have shifted your terms. We began measuring number of players and now you are using number of games.
    No. As a matter of fact, I have said that there are both more overall games, and more overall players.

    These are not mutually contradictory ideas, either.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    This is a completely different assertion than "there are more people playing role-playing games now than ever before."
    No, it is a concurrent truth, and the larger number of games services the larger number of players.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    The shifting sands of your argument and the imprecision of your terms may make this debate ultimately fruitless, in my opinion.
    As opposed to your tapdancing and refusing to ante up any of your so-called "facts" which don't need to be demonstrated because, well, you said so?

    You are drifting in the aether of your own assertions, my friend.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gentlegamer
    And shaking out precision in the terms we use to make assertions.
    What was that Gary was saying a little while ago about, "Do as I say, not as I do?"

    You're providing an excellent demonstration of that habit.

  2. #192
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    534
    Thanks, guys, for polluting what was an otherwise interesting thread. I found the insights about UA and early play styles most enlightening, while your quibbling is quite the opposite. Why not start a new thread instead of continuing your pointless "discussion" here?

  3. #193
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    33,120

    Folks, in the name of civility, I'm going to ask you to please tone down the point-by-point attempts to one-up each other on points and definitions. This is not a place where one must "win" an argument. Trying to do so through staccato repetition of points you've already stated does not make this a nice place to discuss things.

    I suggest folks ought to remember that agreeing to disagree is a viable alternative.

  4. #194
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Far from the nearest settlement, away from traveled routes, and high upon a craggy hill. . .
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by Col_Pladoh
    Ad for Quas', if he was there then what he says has some weight. If all he is doing is quoting what was written somewhere, secondary source material unquestionably, then it is no more than yet another opinion. Any refutation by one that was there is at least as valid an opinion...
    First, I was "there." I've played and DMed D&D for 27 years. The only version of D&D I haven't played is the original, 1974 edition.

    Second, much of what I quote is primary source material: You. I've read just about everything you have ever written about D&D -- your rule books, your adventures, your articles, your responses in message board threads, etc. The quote in the opening post is directly from your article in Dragon magazine. All the follow up quotes I've given in this thread are also your own words. In my thread discussing the treasure and experience points in AD&D1 adventure modules, the data all comes from modules listing you as the author.

    I've also read (and sometimes quote) a lot of what other people at the time of AD&D1 wrote in Dragon magazine, in TSR-published adventure modules, etc. I figure what people said and wrote at the time is at least as relevant and accurate as what people now are saying now in their reminisces.

    Quasqueton

  5. #195
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    5,067
    Quote Originally Posted by molonel
    It's certainly a valid question. But if we're going to consider what is a "true" roleplaying game, and discount games that are merely "seek & destroy missions" then doesn't that eliminate rather a lot of the gaming experiences we've enjoyed and talked about, here?
    I don't view it the same way as Gary but I do agree the games by nature are different enough that I don't lump them together.

    There is such a vast difference between say D&D at a tabletop and an MMOG, the type of experiences they create that I don't put them in the same category. Neverwinter Nights with a DM is different than WoW in most ways too, its seeking to emulate the tabletop using the video game medium way more than an MMO. I've played a lot of MMOG and it just can't scratch the same itch as the tabletop game and its by design. Pretty much as everyone has to be a star and not just you as is the case in a RPG. You can't be the one to save the queen, everyone else paid too and they want to do it as well. There is role playing at times in MMO's, but I've also seen/done rp'ing in Talisman or other board games as well.

  6. #196
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Toronto & Milwaukee
    Posts
    1,802
    Quote Originally Posted by molonel
    ... Quas's point is simply to wipe away some of the nostalgia, and paint a slightly more realistic picture. His point is valid...
    Why is his "point" "valid"? What exactly is his point? Is it simply that the old modules had lots of loot, that players back then were 'munchkins' (or 'power gamers', or whatever), etc.? Big deal. It seems like a rather uninteresting, petty "point" to devote such energy towards, in multiple threads over multiple years.

    As for the alleged need to "wipe away some of the nostalgia", what kind of moral imperative is there to do this? (Heaven forbid that people might have positive memories of their early RPG experiences!) In any case, the fact of the matter is is that many people play 1e AD&D (and OD&D, and Basic/Expert D&D, etc.) today, often because they prefer it over 3e. How can that be "nostalgia"?
    :\

    As I said earlier in this thread, I can't believe that people devote so much energy to such a pointless debate. People have their preferences -- in this case, 3e versus 1e AD&D. Most of the 'points' being made by people here seem to be attempts to give an objective veneer to their subjective preferences.

  7. #197
    Huh.

    I've never played a MMORPG, but I've played a few solo computer RPGs, and I certainly do think that they are role-playing-games in every sense of the words. Players can be either roleplayers or munchkins or something in-between.

    With all due respect to Col. Pladoh, he is not only the father of RPGs but also the father of CRPGs and MMORPGs. Without D&D I doubt the other two genres would ever exist.

    Therefore they are definitely a subset of roleplaying games.

    BTW, while I played 1st edition AD&D (as well as the red and blue boxed sets that I started out with) most of my early playing was with the boxed set, by myself, twenty-five years ago or more. And I certainly munchkinned my characters, as many do. I also enjoyed myself immensely playing pretend within the structured rules (even with bending them to the breaking point).

    I started learning computer programming around the same time. What were some of the first kinds of things I wanted to program? RPG simulations, of course! And so did many of my friends. The mathematical orientation of computers and the statistical basis of RPGs are a natural match. Not to mention playing a role in which you take actions that you would or could never do in real life.

    So yes, MMORPGs and CRPGs are roleplaying games. No question in my mind. They come from the same root -- D&D and the wargames that came before them.

  8. #198
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    6,214
    I roleplayed a character once in Morrowind, a single player crpg. This PC would never steal and in my mind was akin to a lawful evil alignment - nasty, brutal, murderous, hated thieves, tough-minded, unyielding and adhered to strict rules of behaviour.

    That's the furthest I've gone, in Morrowind it's quite restrictive if you don't steal - it's by far the easiest way to get ahead. Mostly in crpgs I do whatever it takes to 'win' but I often, maybe always, have some notion of character concept, it's hard not to.

    In other words, I do exactly what people do in tabletop rpging - mostly success driven with some character stuff.

    Thinking about it, I'm quite surprised myself by how similar my approach is in both types of game.

    Oh, and computer roleplaying games are actually called roleplaying games. The name is kind of a giveaway.

  9. #199
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Posts
    6,214
    Quote Originally Posted by Akrasia
    What exactly is his point?
    Adding scholarship to the edition war, imo.

  10. #200
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Toronto & Milwaukee
    Posts
    1,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug McCrae
    Adding scholarship to the edition war, imo.
    Given that the "war" is inane (is it every going to be "won"?), the need to "add scholarship" to it seems equally inane.

    I have to confess that years ago I participated in some battles in this "war". In retrospect, it was a massive waste of time.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Similar Threads

  1. Are you a good role player?
    By Crothian in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: Friday, 1st April, 2005, 09:26 PM
  2. Are you a Roll-Player or a Role-player?
    By Mista Collins in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Wednesday, 13th August, 2003, 12:15 PM
  3. Roll Player -> Role Player .. hopefully
    By Ave Rage in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Sunday, 13th April, 2003, 07:24 AM
  4. What are you? Powergamer or role-player?
    By Eternalknight in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: Tuesday, 4th June, 2002, 02:44 AM
  5. How deep is the Division? Roll Player & Role Player
    By Valicor in forum *General Roleplaying Games Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: Thursday, 9th May, 2002, 06:41 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •