Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4379935" data-attributes="member: 18280">Video-GameyFrom my point of view, &quot;video-gamey&quot; refers to a failure to meet simulationist goals, particularly the &quot;reasonable man&quot; standard.&nbsp; In a video game, I cannot take just any action that a resonable person with the skill set of my character could take; I am limited in my actions by the imagination of the designer.The inability for a character to use mundane tactics more than once per day, or once per encounter, even though the tactics might be both reasonable and appropriate violates the &quot;reasonable man&quot; standard.&nbsp; Combined with this is the idea of aggro mechanics that can force my opponents to also violate the &quot;reasonable man&quot; standard, and it seems more like the action is limited by the programmer than by the participants.I readily admit that this is not an objective criteria for defining &quot;video-gamey&quot;.&nbsp; Moreover, I admit that being able to control one's opponents' actions to some degree (using extraordinary, though mundane, methods) may make sense (from a simulationist standpoint).&nbsp; It is not the presence of these elements, but the degree to which they are present, that I dislike.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 4379935, member: 18280"] [b]Video-Gamey[/b] From my point of view, "video-gamey" refers to a failure to meet simulationist goals, particularly the "reasonable man" standard. In a video game, I cannot take just any action that a resonable person with the skill set of my character could take; I am limited in my actions by the imagination of the designer. The inability for a character to use mundane tactics more than once per day, or once per encounter, [i][b]even though the tactics might be both reasonable and appropriate[/b][/i][b][/b] violates the "reasonable man" standard. Combined with this is the idea of aggro mechanics that can force my opponents to also violate the "reasonable man" standard, and it seems more like the action is limited by the programmer than by the participants. I readily admit that this is not an objective criteria for defining "video-gamey". Moreover, I admit that being able to control one's opponents' actions to some degree (using extraordinary, though mundane, methods) may make sense (from a simulationist standpoint). It is not the presence of these elements, but the degree to which they are present, that I dislike. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification