Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 8964518" data-attributes="member: 6696971">My understanding of the primary difference of the S in the GDS model vs the S in the GNS model is the following:GDS: Simulation here is primarily interested in facilitating a functional Gamist layer from moment to moment. Its about building out a working model, nailing down causal relationships, preoccupied with internal consistency so that players decision-trees are sufficiently informed to explore and resolve challenges in an imagined space.If an “experiential quality of being there” is achieved…well sure, but that’s somewhere in the 2nd/3rd order effect of by-proxy and incidental.GNS: My understanding here is the agenda is concerned with the sustained “experiential quality of being there” whether “there” is an imagined space underwritten by genre trapping and trope or something more akin to our material world (modern or historical). If the execution of that primary goal facilitates another functional layer of challenge-based play (regardless of what that challenge may be), it is incidental as all focus of design and play operationalizing should be on the primary goal.[HR][/HR]Ironically, the GNS version is a speculative means to its own end while the GDS version is a means to the “G” end (while embracing the by-proxy/incidental part).That is my understanding. Specificity and breadth of focus and design goal + goal’s relationship with incidentals. Could be subtly wrong (or worse) here as its not something I’ve been preoccupied with historically, but that is my sense of things.[HR][/HR]Finally, yes, you absolutely can have Sim design goals and execution that suck at creating an “experiential quality of being there” or suck at “facilitating Gamism” or suck at both.And you can also have people that don’t actually understand what the experiential quality of being there is cognitively like because they have little to no first-hand experience and are relying on their imaginings and internalizing of genre tropes as (mistaken) cognitive shorthand. But boy will they be sure to tell you that well-designed system or someone with actual experience is wrong on the matter!The suite of 4e Defender mechanics is the mother load of this one. I’ve grappled my whole life, I’ve been in multiple physical conflicts with 3-5 people, and I’ve played football and basketball my entire life. The integrated area/participant control suite of abilities in 4e Fighters is easily the best version of this ever on offer (amazingly managing the G, both versions of S, while facilitating the address premise of GNS N), yet the “THIS IS THE WORST/MOST RIDICULOUS/MOST VIDEO GAMEY THING EVER” refrain by a loud cohort of detractors/agitators bent on burning everything to the ground was absolutely deafening.</blockquote>

Verification