Is there a strong case? How so? Your explanation doesn't offer one.
This what I was talking about in referring to interactivity. Games are about
doing the things being depicted, not merely watching them be done. That neccessitates a stronger focus on things that'd be superflous in most films.
Should be noted though, film isn't exactly that monolithic on this subject. For instance, ever heard of the idea that most really good Action movies are basically just musicals? Stripping away all the pretense of blood, bombs, and bullets, most good ones are structurally identical to musicals, and it makes sense too. Fight choreography is just a very specific kind of dance, and its why actors like Chris Evans are praised on set by stunt people for being able to quickly grok what they do despite not being as deeply into it as they are. Evans is a song and dance guy, and the skills translate over.
A lot of people look at the paper thin plots of movies like John Wick and kind of miss all the great attention to detail that goes into the choreography, which is where the real meat of movies like that are; there's a reason why John Wick actually committing to real mag capacities was such a revelation for that genre, because it proved you could do the minutia and make it exciting.
Musicals tend to have the same issue if the one critiquing doesn't appreciate where the effort was put in, and the best musicals tend to go all the way and make the whole show a musical, rather than just cordoned off set piece scenes. One of RENTs most famous songs, La Vie Boheme, spends about 2 or 3 minutes just singing through dialogue and a rather funny scene at a restaurant before the song proper starts.
So coming back over to games, the same ideas still count for a lot. You
can do things like this and make it a worthwhile part of the game. Hence the Last of Us as an example.
You mean the increasingly-hated annoying busywork that videogames are starting to backtrack on because of the audience getting increasingly tired with it?
A thing that, even where it works, is a strictly a solitary activity and wholly incompatible with active multiplayer stuff?
That's mostly there as filler to make people go grind materials?
That crafting?
Yes, studios chasing trends have repetitively proven that they comprise mostly of hacks completely bankrupt of creativity.
That doesn't make the base idea bad, we just have a 1000 ways to not make good crafting mechanics.
And crafting isn't incompatible with active multiplayer, it just hasn't been done in a lot of places. Space Engineers is an example of that in video games, and obviously in the tabletop space most people are still just copy-pasting the same anemic skill check and time gate mechanics, so you won't likely find examples there.
It's not a major theme of the books!
A LOTR video game isn't the books.
It's not a major theme of the books! In fact, it's somewhat actively antithetical to them - it's remarkable that Narsil is reforged, because in this age, such weapons are no longer forged!
That doesn't have any bearing on the idea of well done Smithing being a fun part of a LOTR game.
It's a not a thing that's likely to be relevant to most campaigns. It's not likely to possible to involve the whole party without massive contrivance. It's a waste of space.
I disagree. I think you should have a more open mind; nothing about these ideas calls for the sheer hostility you're reacting with right now.
In fact you're perfectly proving Matt Colville's point re: one-off mechanics.
You should do me the respect of actually reading what I say; one-off mechanics aren't even remotely what I'm talking about.
Which is exactly what forging rules in a LotR RPG would be
This is circular logic. There mere presence does not lead to those conclusions, you need to actually examine the mechanics and how they're integrated into the game.
You can't assert this conclusion based on a hypothetical game where the assumption is that it was actually done right.
They oppose the basic themes of
The themes of LOTR aren't affected by the presence of smithing as a mechanic or even something that simply exists. This pretty absurd hyperbole that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
Its like saying acknowledging people have to eat and making it a part of the gameloop somehow contradicts the themes of good versus evil, the importance of hope, or whT have you.
Heck, given one of the themes that LOTR emphasizes is the impact small actions can have on the tides of history, I'd actually say a LOTR game
should have more of this.
Hell, the main character of the entire saga is a person who is fundamentally struggling through the minutia of real life on their path. Frodo didn't have the convenience of skipping over having to travel or survive in an increasingly hostile wilderness.
Which RPGs, specifically, do you think have achieved this? And are they just going to be a list of the least cinematic/heroic RPGs going lol?
Afaik, none have. We don't have a lot of innovators (re: none) in this space focusing on these ideas, and I don't actually know yet if my own take would count.
That kind of appeal, however, is fallacious. Engage the idea; don't rely on easy excuses to disregard it.
www.backerkit.com
