What does Videogamey mean to you?

[Garthanos]

I reacted to WoW... as holy cow I am playing in somebodies D&D world... but everything is so delaid reflexes and aiming don't mean anything no computing parabolic arcs of the path of the fire balls you only have to point vaguely in the right direction (I use to play fantasy quake). And the WoW art is nice but followed by but I am damn restricted on what my character looks like I cant actually build a trim human male? ... and I cant build a custom class (both largely in comparison to another video game - Oblivion). Later after exposure to 4e I added and I cant re-skin the damn powers either. It is mindless fun when you are doing PvE and I cant seem to get that much in to PvP - I always liked Cooperative mode on Fantasy Quake and being able to build my own expansion to an expansion of it ... was a real blast... these latter bits made the Quake feel for me more like D&D because I got to put creative influence in to the mold.
D&D with heavily defined worlds like some people seem to enjoy is very WoWish to me.

I very much expect over time to see more comments like I wish D&D was more like <insert the uber digital rpg that uses a combination of Avatar facial expression technology and hired humans playing dm/npcs />

 

[Hussar]

Again, the multiplicity of meanings is immaterial- many perfectly good words have dozens of definitions, like "run."

True. However, very few meanings of "run" are not very obvious in context. If I'm talking about running a program, not too many people would think Nike shoes. However, if I'm engaged in a running program, they would.

OTOH, other than "I don't like this" videogamey has, as was posted, over a dozen meanings, any number of which could be applicable in a given context. Other than, "Do not want" the reader is left flailing about trying to find a meaning.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

OTOH, other than "I don't like this" videogamey has, as was posted, over a dozen meanings, any number of which could be applicable in a given context. Other than, "Do not want" the reader is left flailing about trying to find a meaning.

But again, how does knowing a poster's exact situational definition of "videogamey" help anyone?

It will go down like this:

1) You ask for the clarification.

2) You get the clarification.

3) You then try to counter the assertion derived from the clarification.

4) The other party reacts negatively to your counter-assertion, because you're telling them their perceptions and feelings are wrong.

Intellectual death spiral ensues because we've shoved the discussion down the path of badwrongperception.

There is no discussion of "videogamey" that is going to change someone's feeling that the game is thus; skip the query of clarification, and get on with the business of debating things you might actually be able to solve with debate!

 

[FireLance]

And I posit that NOBODY has solutions to the game being perceived as videogamey by certain people, making the discussion of particulars pointless.

At the risk of repeating myself, it is not pointless even if some people can't be persuaded or have their concern addressed, but only if all people can't be persuaded or have their concern addressed.

The people being persuaded need not even include the person taking part in the conversation! Because these exchanges take place in a public forum, the audience includes everyone reading the messageboard post (Hi, everyone! ).

If just one person reads a post and concludes, "I used to believe that this was a video game trope, but now I see that it did not originate with video games," or "I used to think this was unrealistic, but I now have an idea of how to make it plausible," then I believe that the discussion was not pointless.

What to me is closer to pointless is the simple declaration that, "This is videogamey!" with no further elaboration. I wouldn't say it's completely pointless because it still tells me that the speaker thinks something is similar to video games. It's the why and the how that would lead to a more interesting discussion, provided, of course, the speaker is interested in such a discussion and does not consider it pointless.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

At the risk of repeating myself, it is not pointless even if some people can't be persuaded or have their concern addressed, but only if all people can't be persuaded or have their concern addressed.

In your experience, has anyone been convinced that 4Ed isn't videogamey by being told that it isn't for reasons N, N+1, N+2...and N+X?

If just one person reads a post and concludes, "I used to believe that this was a video game trope, but now I see that it did not originate with video games," or "I used to think this was unrealistic, but I now have an idea of how to make it plausible," then I believe that the discussion was not pointless.

The assertion isn't that something is a video game trope, exclusive or original to video games, only that it reminds them of video games in some negative fashion. It may only exist predominantly in video games (relative to other things), or even exist only in one video game that the person has experienced.

That the same something occurs elsewhere will not erase that person's negative, video game connotation. They're still going to have that mental connection.

 

[FireLance]

In your experience, has anyone been convinced that 4Ed isn't videogamey by being told that it isn't for reasons N, N+1, N+2...and N+X?

I have seen people change their minds (or at least, state that they have changed their minds) after some discussion, some new information is been made available to them, or some new explanation is provided to them, in other threads, as well as in real life. I see no reason why the issue of whether something is videogamey or not should be an exception.

The assertion isn't that something is a video game trope, exclusive or original to video games, only that it reminds them of video games in some negative fashion. It may only exist predominantly in video games (relative to other things), or even exist only in one video game that the person has experienced.

That the same something occurs elsewhere will not erase that person's negative, video game connotation. They're still going to have that mental connection.

What makes you so certain that other people will never change their minds?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I have seen people change their minds (or at least, state that they have changed their minds) after some discussion, some new information is been made available to them, or some new explanation is provided to them, in other threads, as well as in real life. I see no reason why the issue of whether something is videogamey or not should be an exception.
What makes you so certain that other people will never change their minds?

Because, in my experience, I haven't seen a single person dissuaded of their assertion that 4Ed is "videogamey."

It would be great if you could post a link to a post by someone who says so.

(Yes, I realize that request borders on the impossible.)

The closest I've seen is someone stating that they think the game is less videogamey than they originally thought, but I've not seen a single, total recantation.

 

[Hussar]

Because, in my experience, I haven't seen a single person dissuaded of their assertion that 4Ed is "videogamey."

It would be great if you could post a link to a post by someone who says so.

(Yes, I realize that request borders on the impossible.)

The closest I've seen is someone stating that they think the game is less videogamey than they originally thought, but I've not seen a single, total recantation.

So, basically, you're saying that dropping something like Videogamey is the same as Godwinning. It cannot be discussed, no productive back and forth can come from it, it's simply there, like some giant bolus of undigestable meat. And, as such should be blocked out from the reader's perceptions and completely ignored.

Would that be an accurate summation?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So, basically, you're saying that dropping something like Videogamey is the same as Godwinning. It cannot be discussed, no productive back and forth can come from it, it's simply there, like some giant bolus of undigestable meat. And, as such should be blocked out from the reader's perceptions and completely ignored.

Would that be an accurate summation?

That's pretty close, close enough for me.

Now, if someone actually shows me a post or comes out and posts that they were convinced (with appropriate proof that they had formerly used "videogamey" as a pejorative on 4Ed), I'd obviously have to recant and reconsider that position.

(Frickin' Nazis!)

 

[Garthanos]

Well I thought Danny said dont feed the trolls.