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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hawkeyefan" data-source="post: 9624164" data-attributes="member: 6785785">No, it was not about talk of a trade off that started this tangent. It was the use of “real” to privilege one sort of game. We could perhaps talk about what the pros and cons of each approach are… but if we can’t get past this idea that one is real and one is not, it may be difficult to get there. Shared-storytelling? I mean, I’m not always crazy about using that term for an RPG as opposed to some subset of RPGs that would include a game like Fiasco or Microscope. But the idea that the games you call narrative are more about shared storytelling than trad games are is pretty silly. Calling your make believe real and others not real is pretty semantic, no?I mean, I just watched my son playing Fortnite and he broke into a vault with a ton of riches in it. He did it using explosives and a laser cutter. If some other videogame worked that he had to solve some mini-game puzzle to break into the lock, I’d be silly to describe the Fortnite method as real, wouldn’t I?Neither is actually breaking into a vault. One may appear to have a more one to one sense of causality to it… but that doesn’t make it real. Thinking it does is… like I said way back in the thread… mistaking the illusion of cause and effect for actual cause and effect. Right, but what you’re comparing it to… your basis for analysis… seems to be detective fiction. Where an author has predetermined the facts of the story and the protagonist… and vicariously the reader/viewer… will try and figure it out. But if we describe it that way, you balk. Yes, you want to dress it up as more than it is. You try to use words that don’t apply or that obscure the fact that the GM is making stuff up, and the players want to figure out what he’s made up.</blockquote>

Verification