Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5716223" data-attributes="member: 3192">Pemerton, Baker is very much in the postmodern camp of game design and other positions are moderately and even radically different to what you quoted. This isn't to say somehow he is wrong, only that the scope of games possible under the viewpoint he is expressing is self limiting. There are other kinds of games, other opinions, other people who prefer other points of view.To pick it apart some. First he defines role playing is a negotiation rather than a learning process as most schools define it. Puzzle games, which don't include negotiation, are often cast as essentially tyrannical in this moral view. But puzzle games focus on discovery rather than or over improvisation. The mechanics are hidden and treated as code, a kind of rule like when we talk of the rules of the universe. The proverbial physics or game engine of an RPG.Again, this isn't to say that postmodern game design is somehow wrong. It's more to the fact that other opinions like postnarrative are not to be excluded. The last sentence you quoted instead points to a rather absolutist position.</blockquote>