Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8149834" data-attributes="member: 6795602">Whether you created it or simply chose to use someone elses definition that they created is a bit beside the point IMO.Most of the definition you provided includes a bunch of ultimately subjective qualities.  You speak of "fundamentally changed states" as if that's some kind of objective measure.  You speak of premise/objectives but only count certain premises/objectives.  You speak of marching toward the endgame as if the goal of every game is to have an ultimate winning condition. There's tons of exclusions there.A distinction without a difference?Wait - are you posturing that bad referee calls are irrelevant to the game state?Only parts of TTRPG's do.  Unless it's a TTRPG with mechanics that allows a player to introduce plot elements, in which case - in which case virtually every bit of that game gets included in the definition....  It's almost like that definition was made for that particular style of game.No.  It just means you have to introduce the concept of meaningful gamestates. In the original Final Fantasy 7 there was a part of a game where you could go on a date with another character.  Quite entertaining but totally trivial in relation to anything "important" in the game.  If certain choices were made you would get different reactions from those characters later on.  In computer game design those choices would definitely be referred to as gamestates even though the overall thrust was trivial to the larger issues in the game. I think that's part of the disconnect.</blockquote>

Verification