Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 5760383" data-attributes="member: 1106">The idea of &quot;progression&quot;, &quot;evolution&quot;, and &quot;moving forward&quot; with regard to art in general, and the artform of games design in particular, is a nonsense borrowed from science theory.Art is more like the fashion industry, which recognizes that it's just cycles, not progression, and little that is objectively better.&nbsp; Right now &quot;gamist game design theory&quot; is in fashion.&nbsp; It's in no way objectively an advance on other theories, and is arguably less popular than former cycles in terms of RPGs (and we know where it leads - the pseudo-RPG abstractions of games like Talisman and M:tG, neither of which is a desirable destination for D&amp;D and already exist) so best to nip this line of thought as 4E being somehow an objective &quot;move forward&quot;, very much in the bud.&nbsp; IMO it's many great leaps backward, and just a symptom of thinking of a specific time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 5760383, member: 1106"] The idea of "progression", "evolution", and "moving forward" with regard to art in general, and the artform of games design in particular, is a nonsense borrowed from science theory. Art is more like the fashion industry, which recognizes that it's just cycles, not progression, and little that is objectively better. Right now "gamist game design theory" is in fashion. It's in no way objectively an advance on other theories, and is arguably less popular than former cycles in terms of RPGs (and we know where it leads - the pseudo-RPG abstractions of games like Talisman and M:tG, neither of which is a desirable destination for D&D and already exist) so best to nip this line of thought as 4E being somehow an objective "move forward", very much in the bud. IMO it's many great leaps backward, and just a symptom of thinking of a specific time. [/QUOTE]

Verification