Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6413418" data-attributes="member: 3192">I don't agree with most of what you're saying here. But wanted to point out that there is no such thing as a conflict resolution mechanic in a game just like there is no such thing as narrative resolution outside of a story.Game mechanics define the game constructs that make up games. There are no narrative components to games. Including conflict, which is a narrative device.What the Big Model does is use narrative theory and hundreds of narrative terms and uses them exclusively in reference to games. And never references actual game design theory from the hundreds of years prior to it. It is not just the whitewashing of roleplaying games and peoples thoughts, but all games in general. Which is what it purports to be. A theory that explains all games.Nowhere else will you see the belief that all games require the act of performing a character and therefore all gamers must have a &quot;stance&quot; and all games must be treated as &quot;fictional narrative&quot;.&nbsp; There are no narrative in games because games are simply different. Making all things stories is the uniformity of groupthink bordering on fascism from that community.I mean, stories don't even exist except as a culture. It's simply a long tradition of ideas. Not an actuality. No one should let their culture be conformed into another's, especially narrative culture, just because of some determinedly close-minded people.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 6413418, member: 3192"] I don't agree with most of what you're saying here. But wanted to point out that there is no such thing as a conflict resolution mechanic in a game just like there is no such thing as narrative resolution outside of a story. Game mechanics define the game constructs that make up games. There are no narrative components to games. Including conflict, which is a narrative device. What the Big Model does is use narrative theory and hundreds of narrative terms and uses them exclusively in reference to games. And never references actual game design theory from the hundreds of years prior to it. It is not just the whitewashing of roleplaying games and peoples thoughts, but all games in general. Which is what it purports to be. A theory that explains all games. Nowhere else will you see the belief that all games require the act of performing a character and therefore all gamers must have a "stance" and all games must be treated as "fictional narrative". There are no narrative in games because games are simply different. Making all things stories is the uniformity of groupthink bordering on fascism from that community. I mean, stories don't even exist except as a culture. It's simply a long tradition of ideas. Not an actuality. No one should let their culture be conformed into another's, especially narrative culture, just because of some determinedly close-minded people. [/QUOTE]

Verification