Unpopular opinions go here

[Reynard]

The end of simulation as a design goal for most RPGs has done more to advance the state of the hobby than anything else. This isn't to say that no simulation based games can be fun, but designing toward fun rather than stumbling on it accidentally is a great improvement in TTRPG design culture.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Of the many concussions I've had, most were in football, then a few snowboarding, and only 1 in Muay Thai, after I got swept during a non-sweeping drill. Getting rocked in sparring wasn't even a thing really in all the years I did it, but that one sweep out of nowhere messed me up for days.

I got quite a number sparring in boxing and Muay Thai in the Boston area (and a few competing in martial arts as well). Places tend to soar hard here. I even had one that was quite severe. But I think the big difference with doing Sanshou which allows slamming people to ground is I felt like I was always walking around concussed (and getting slammed is such a full body experience too)

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

View attachment 295171

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One thing I learned living in Italy for 3 years is eating something made in the city it originated in and made the way it traditionally was made is usually a pretty different thing. Even within the country something originated in, there can be a pretty noticable difference in how food is prepared from the city or region it came from.

A simple change in the quality of ingredients can make a surprisingly big difference as well. I was a teen on a chaperoned trip to Europe, and at one point, we stayed in the Cistercian monastery in Rome for a few days.

One thing I’ll remember unto death was that the continental breakfasts we got there are among the best I’ve EVER had. The bread was baked fresh that morning. The butter & cheese were brought in daily from the dairies outside Rome. I strongly suspect the fruit preserves were not store bought either. I can almost taste those meals over 30 years later.

 

[Reynard]

Unpopular Opinion: the vast majority of time that gamers call something "bad design" what they mean is "I did not like it" and the fact is that most don't actually understand game design well enough to identify something as good or bad design.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Unpopular Opinion: the vast majority of time that gamers call something "bad design" what they mean is "I did not like it" and the fact is that most don't actually understand game design well enough to identify something as good or bad design.

Counter point (and also unpopular opinion):

When people say they do not like something, they are responding to the design of the game. That doesn't mean that the game is poorly designed in general, but it does mean that the game was poorly designed for what they want.

Shorter version- there is no such thing as an abstract "great design" in games. There are just games that are well-designed for particular uses. If you have something that is "incredibly well designed", but nobody wants to play it, then it really isn't great design after all.

 

[HaroldTheHobbit]

Saying that a roleplaying game can run any genre or setting is about like saying that the pig can wear any color of lipstick.

Well, Savage Worlds have an amazing palette of suidae make-up.

 

[Reynard]

Counter point (and also unpopular opinion):

When people say they do not like something, they are responding to the design of the game. That doesn't mean that the game is poorly designed in general, but it does mean that the game was poorly designed for what they want.

Shorter version- there is no such thing as an abstract "great design" in games. There are just games that are well-designed for particular uses. If you have something that is "incredibly well designed", but nobody wants to play it, then it really isn't great design after all.

Sure, but that is still a user problem. if you are mad OD&D is not supporting your romantic fantasy campaign, that is a you problem.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Sure, but that is still a user problem. if you are mad OD&D is not supporting your romantic fantasy campaign, that is a you problem.

I mean, kind of.

I think that we can differentiate these things.

There is design that is good for a purpose, and then there are people that don't like particular designs ... even if that design is well-suited for a purpose. Moreover, I think that a lot of people conflate different issues- for example, what are the constraints and issues that go into designing for certain purposes?

The people that design for D&D, for example, both have the luxury of designing for a brand, but also have severe design constraints; they have to design for a much larger population, and they have to be very careful about legacy issues. This is in contrast to someone designing an RPG from scratch that is made for a one-shot, and is designed for a small segment of the playing population.

So that's why I think that the idea that this is fundamentally a user problem isn't correct. It is possible to look at design issues, but the problem is that most people don't want to acknowledge that there is no single "best design," just like there isn't a single best design for most products. If you're designing a sports car, you aren't going to end up with the same thing (hopefully!) than you would if you're designing a pickup truck. If you're trying to maximize fuel efficiency, you're going to sacrifice power.

Design is always about trade-offs, and thinking about the eventual end user. Far too often, people fall into the trap of thinking, "Oh, it's not the problem of this game, it's the problem of the user." Which ... doesn't really work. It's far better to think of design in terms of how it impacts the experience of the people that the game was designed for; in other words, is it well-designed for the use case?

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean, kind of.

I think that we can differentiate these things.

There is design that is good for a purpose, and then there are people that don't like particular designs ... even if that design is well-suited for a purpose. Moreover, I think that a lot of people conflate different issues- for example, what are the constraints and issues that go into designing for certain purposes?

The people that design for D&D, for example, both have the luxury of designing for a brand, but also have severe design constraints; they have to design for a much larger population, and they have to be very careful about legacy issues. This is in contrast to someone designing an RPG from scratch that is made for a one-shot, and is designed for a small segment of the playing population.

So that's why I think that the idea that this is fundamentally a user problem isn't correct. It is possible to look at design issues, but the problem is that most people don't want to acknowledge that there is no single "best design," just like there isn't a single best design for most products. If you're designing a sports car, you aren't going to end up with the same thing (hopefully!) than you would if you're designing a pickup truck. If you're trying to maximize fuel efficiency, you're going to sacrifice power.

Design is always about trade-offs, and thinking about the eventual end user. Far too often, people fall into the trap of thinking, "Oh, it's not the problem of this game, it's the problem of the user." Which ... doesn't really work. It's far better to think of design in terms of how it impacts the experience of the people that the game was designed for; in other words, is it well-designed for the use case?

Very true. Where this gets fraught is in situations where a game changes its design because the designers have decided to change what people they designed it for, or expanded the segment of the playing population they are designing for such that many of them no longer get as much of the experience they want.