Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8959633" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Alright, quick lookback at what I was responding to (I'll go ahead and tag [USER=29398]@Lanefan[/USER] here because he responded as well):This was your response to me when I made a post that broke out the three essential parts (in one of multiple ways to look at games):* GM's say* Player's say* System's saySo the first two are participants at the table that are executing the game.  The analog to this is the owner/driver of the Porsche GT3.The third one is the designers/engineers/artists executing their design process into a realized product.  That then is onboarded by the above participants in order to experience the realized product.  That is the Porsche GT3.From what I can tell by the statement I've quoted directly above, you're attempting to carve out a position of "there is no system's say (there are only participants opting in or out of whatever the system - eg designers - has to say)", which is not a terribly uncommon refrain among a subset of gamers. So, in my Porsche 911 GT3 question (which is a paragon example of extremely tightly integrated, holistic design where every constituent part is meticulously married to the others...where the experience is very sensitive to fundamental changes), I'm attempting to figure out the limits of your position here.  Surely it can't be that all designs are opt-in, opt-out.  Scale it down to something like a painting you put on your wall at home.  Even if you're an extremely capable artist, you're likely to be disinclined toward "oh, I'll just add a tree...riiiiiiiiight...there (!)"  Right?  Or do the paintings on the walls of your home contain various personal contributions or amendments to them (like the tree)?  Same goes for your music; have you dubbed in a line that you thought up or re-recorded something with another layer of percussion or strings or something, changing the composition?  Or do you change all your hand-me-down recipes from grandma or whomever?  If you only change some, what is the litmus test for the change?So that is what I'm asking.  When something it a tightly integrated, holistic design with meticulous marriage of each constituent part...and the experience of the thing is sensitive to fundamental changes...what is your litmus test for the change?  And related, do the engineers of the Porsche 911 GT3 have no say (no "system's say")?  What about the artist and the painting?  What about the band and its song?  What about grandma and her recipe?  When does grandma and her recipe have its "say?"  Does it (the Porsche, the painting, the song, the recipe) never have a "say" in the matter and so you deem its always just the owner/driver/replicator's decision to opt-in or opt-out of her design/system?  Or is that "say" only proportional to expertise in the discipline (you're going to make changes to the song if you're an expert musician, changes to the painting if you're an expert painter, changes to grandma's recipe if you're a capable cook, etc)?  What are the boundaries of this?  Does this litmus test hold for all holistic, meticulously balanced, sensitive to fundamental changes, ecosystems (complex network of interconnected systems)?  What are the limits to these things (the decision to make changes vs deference to the design platform and its results)?</blockquote>

Verification