Computers beat up my role player

[Cameron]

There has to be a joke in here about NPCs... but I don't think I'll go there...

I'd lean more towards cohorts, but you are right. Let's *not* go there...

 

[Raven Crowking]

To be blunt, you are far too late to be condemning the "unacceptability" of this term now. It is already widespread, and might already be wider spread than the use of RPG for D&D type games. One of the most important classic videogame RPGs, Dragon Quest, was first released in May of 1986, and has thus been considered an RPG for 21 years. There are much older games for the PC. Whole generations have grown up calling that game an RPG. Any battle to avoid the usage of that name has already been lost.

Surely you understand linguistic drift enough to know that what seems "lost" now might be "won" later. Nor I am just now condemning the term; this argument is as old as the first computer "role-playing" game and will be going on, I imagine, long after you and I are dust.

I said that, because of historical similarity, a new definition for RPG has been created.

Okay then, if you go back upthread, you'll see that I said the something along the same lines earlier. Consider, then, that there are two definitions of rpg, the original one (Def A) and the new one (Def B). The set of objects that falls within Def A is called X, and the set of objects that falls within Def B is called Y. It is possible for any one of these to be true:

1. Set X and Set Y are the same set.
2. Set Y contains Set X.
3. Set X contains Set Y.
4. Set X and Set Y overlap.
5. Set X and Set Y do not overlap.

What I contend is (2). Set Y (those objects falling under Def B) contains within it a subset which is Set X. However, the borders of Set X (those objects falling under Def A) do not include additional objects of Set Y by association.

If the term in question was "fish" and Def A was "any non-tetrapod chordate, i.e., a animal with a backbone, has gills throughout life, and have limbs, if any, in the shape of fins" and Def B was "any creature known to spend all or the majority of its life in water", depending upon which definition you were using, a whale would or would not be a fish. However, the inclusion of the whale in Def B in no way implies that it should be included in Def A.

Which is a long-winded way of saying that I agree with your point. However, within the original context in which the meaning of the term was brought up (whether or not rpgs are doing better now or during the TSR run, related to Mr. Gygax's comments in this thread), Def A is the germaine definition.

Moreover, I don't think anyone is telling you that you cannot use Def B if you think it valid; rather some are saying that they do not use Def B and do not consider it valid themselves. Or, at least, that's my position.

RC

 

[TwinBahamut]

Surely you understand linguistic drift enough to know that what seems "lost" now might be "won" later. Nor I am just now condemning the term; this argument is as old as the first computer "role-playing" game and will be going on, I imagine, long after you and I are dust.

Well, considering that the only people who argue this term are the pen and paper RPG players, and the mainstream videogame players don't even know this arguement exists, your argument may not be totally lost, but it seems grim and unfeasible.

I will omit a quote for the rest of your post to save space.

Regardless, Crowking, I think you need to be clearer about exactly what you consider Definition A and Definition B to be exactly, since I think there are two pairs of definitions floating around right now, and I think you are arguing based on a different set than me.

Definition Pair 1:
A (old): "RPG" refers to pen and paper RPGs.
B (new): "RPG" refers to both pen and paper RPGs and electronic RPGs.

In this framework, yes, B is a subset of A, and thus this is what I think you are referring to. But these are not my definitions.

Definition Pair 2:
A (current, alternative to B): "RPG" refers to pen and paper RPGs
B (current, alternative to A): "RPG" refers to a genre of videogames

This is my framework. The concept of "old" and "new" definitions is irrelevent, since they are both currently used, and yet they are not the same.

So, in your X and Y set framework, I am arguing that it is option 4, Set X (pen and paper RPGs) and Set Y (videogame RPGs) are totally different, except where minor overlap occurs (Neverwinter Nights or Baldur's Gate, for example). At the very least, I don't think most makers and fans of videogame RPGs consider their hobby to be a subset of the larger RPG hobby (especially considering that videogame RPGs might very well be more popular and mainstream than pen and paper RPGs as a whole).

 

[ThirdWizard]

Example the usage of the term from a pre-D&D source, please.

It was talked about up thread. I'm not looking for it. Especially since you're sidestepping my (clever) cell phone analogy so readily! I notice that most of my arguments are being ignored. I'll assume that to mean that no one can counter them.

 

[WayneLigon]

By advocating that he is superior, WayneLigon has, in effect, stated that his opinions should matter more than anyone elses. This means that his definition is the "right" one, and that any deviations from that is by default "wrong". Since he is also advocating that point of view, it also is implicitly implied that his is the "right" fun and everyone else are "wrong". That is where the whole wrongbadfun thing comes in.

It's kind of hard for me to explain. I don't say 'wrong' since if you enjoy a play style that minimizes or ignores role playing, then it can hardly be wrong. I do say that a style that emphasizes roleplaying is 'more fun' than when it is absent. Such has been my repeated experience over many years.

It's been my experience that many - certainly not all, but many - of the people that I have encountered who have been in such games and then later go to a game where actual roleplaying occurs, they find the game play experience much much more satisfying. They are likely to return to it again and again, rather than play for awhile and then drop away from the hobby when gaming becomes inconvenient for them.

Btw, what is YMMV? Seen it, but don't know what it means.

Your Milage May Vary; ie, two of us, reading or doing the same thing, may have different experiences based on our own perceptions, opinions, etc.

 

[Cameron]

It's kind of hard for me to explain. I don't say 'wrong' since if you enjoy a play style that minimizes or ignores role playing, then it can hardly be wrong. I do say that a style that emphasizes roleplaying is 'more fun' than when it is absent. Such has been my repeated experience over many years.

This plays directly to "wrongbadfun"...

 

[takyris]

"Hello, everyone, and welcome to the Academic Achievers Messageboard. I know that all of you came here because you take pride in your academic accomplishments, and this entire organization is devoted to discussion of, and improvement of, everyone's academic life.

Now, just to break the ice, I'd like to point something out. I notice that some of you are choosing to study French in school as your foreign language. I've thought about it pretty carefully, and, well, if you're doing that, then you're obviously not interested in real academics.

I mean, seriously. French? Mandarin is the language of the future, quite frankly, in terms of where the big business opportunities are going to be, and if your school doesn't offer Mandarin (which, really, it should), Spanish is the next logical choice in terms of versatility and business preparedness. The very definition of Academic involves the root, Academy, and since academies are designed to prepare people for real-life business pursuits, only languages that further business interests can legitimately be considered academic in nature.

Please bear in mind that I don't consider 'not interested in real academics' to be a value judgment. Some people like true and worthy academic endeavors, and others enjoy learning to conjugate savoir and trying to remember which verbs use "to be" instead of "to have" in their past-tense forms. Both pastimes are challenges, albeit in very different ways, but only Mandarin, and to some extent Spanish, offer a truly academic challenge, and it is improper to speak of anyone studying French or Latin as studying in an academic manner.

I know that many people will incorrectly refer to people studying French as being academic, and I've made my peace with that. For the sake of correctness, however, I will be referring to them as pseudo-academics in my discussions. There is no reason for anyone to be insulted; despite the fact that this is a forum specifically devoted to discussions of an academic nature, people who study these pseudo-academic languages will, I am sure, still be welcome here."

 

[Raven Crowking]

It was talked about up thread. I'm not looking for it. Especially since you're sidestepping my (clever) cell phone analogy so readily! I notice that most of my arguments are being ignored. I'll assume that to mean that no one can counter them.

What argument was ignored that hasn't been answered upthread dozens of times? Give me the post # and I'll be sure to respond.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Definition Pair 2:
A (current, alternative to B): "RPG" refers to pen and paper RPGs
B (current, alternative to A): "RPG" refers to a genre of videogames

I'm fine with this set of definitions in principle, except that I think that your definition A doesn't actually define the term it seeks to define. I believe that the meaning of the term RPG as it relates to "pen and paper RPGs" is large enough to include other forms. For example, D&D played over a server is still D&D. Eventually, if computer technology continues to improve, I imagine that there will be an RPG that meets both A and B.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Except, of course, that you're making up your own definition in order to exclude video game RPGs from the overall RPG category.

It's sort of like if I decided to define phones by having a physical phone line connected to a wall. Now cell phones aren't considered phones anymore. After all, they have no phone line, so anyone who calls them phones is incorrect. Cell phones just simulate phones, they aren't actually phones, since they're based off of phones and have so much in common with them. The fact that we use them for the same purpose has no bearing, because my definition excludes cell phones from being "real" phones. If you were to not use the phone line definition, then we'd have to start calling walky talkies phones!

If this is what you're talking about, TW, then it has been answered:

Excepting, of course, that that meaning of rpg goes back to the roots of the term, was not made up by WayneLigon, and is included or implied in many early rpgs. And, of course, that the person who was most involved in coining the term on this thread stated that it meant what WayneLigon suggests in meant, and that the meaning he uses for it precludes computer games at this time due to the restrictions they impose.​

If your cell phone only worked like two cans on a string, then it would be a simulated phone (at best). If it limited who you called to people within a given area, it will still not function as a phone. Likewise, the limitations of the form, specifically as apply to the ability to play a role are the factors that make myself (and others) say computer games are not, at this time, role-playing games.

RC