Philosophical question: Do games become "obsolete"?

[Odhanan]

But what is an objective assessment? Is an 'objective' assessment just an indication of the predisposition of the assessor?

That's a fair question. There is two solutions to this dilemma:
#1 - there is such a thing as an objective assessment - in this case, the question is indeed to define objective critera that could spawn an objective assessment.
#2 - objective assessments do not exist. Therefore, there isn't any way to know objectively if a game can be technologically obsolete or not. This equals to say that both opinions are true, given the dispositions of each and every beholder.

For the record, objective @ dictionary.com. Relevant definition:
Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair.
Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.

Fair:

Having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favoritism or bias; impartial: a fair mediator.
Just to all parties; equitable: a compromise that is fair to both factions.

 

[JoeGKushner]

evolution: 1. A gradual process in which something changes esp. into a more complex form.

Yeah, I'd say that many game systems evolve. D&D is a perfect example of such.

Games in terms of obsolete?

obsolete: No longer in use or fashion. No longer useful or functioning.

The former is pmore true than the latter.

 

[bubbalin]

That's a fair question. There is two solutions to this dilemma:
#1 - there is such a thing as an objective assessment - in this case, the question is indeed to define objective critera that could spawn an objective assessment.
#2 - objective assessments do not exist. Therefore, there isn't any way to know objectively if a game can be technologically obsolete or not. This equals to say that both opinions are true, given the dispositions of each and every beholder.

For the record, objective @ dictionary.com. Relevant definition:
Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair.
Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.

Fair:

Having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favoritism or bias; impartial: a fair mediator.
Just to all parties; equitable: a compromise that is fair to both factions.

Contradicting myself again, I suppose the best test of objectivity is when parties who disagree in the assessment do agree upon the criteria for assessment. Though is this possible? Because having the same criteria should result in the same assessment...

It's late here... I'm going to bed.

 

[Odhanan]

Contradicting myself again, I suppose the best test of objectivity is when parties who disagree in the assessment do agree upon the criteria for assessment. Though is this possible? Because having the same criteria should result in the same assessment...

It's late here... I'm going to bed.

I think it's possible for people disagreeing to agree on criteras and then yes, they would come up with the same data. But would they interpret the data the same way? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Depends on the fairness of the participants and their willingness to come to a compromise and/or change their opinion. There's nothing wrong with being wrong and changing our opinions, is there?

 

[Tolen Mar]

I can't agree with this. Doesn't matter the number of people still playing a game: look at diaglo for instance: He plays OD&D, doesn't he? So the game is still in use, even if that's a half dozen guys judged "deluded" by the majority of gamers. Some people still play RIFTS, or RuneQuest, or the old Talislanta, or whatever games we can think of, unless maybe if they were, from the very start, fatally flawed in their design.

Just one question then. Does that mean that since I can look up a club (and it isnt that hard) that is filled to the brim with members that insist on using their old 8-tracks, 8-tracks are therefore not obsolete by your definition?

 

[nakia]

That's a fair question. There is two solutions to this dilemma:
#1 - there is such a thing as an objective assessment - in this case, the question is indeed to define objective critera that could spawn an objective assessment.
#2 - objective assessments do not exist. Therefore, there isn't any way to know objectively if a game can be technologically obsolete or not. This equals to say that both opinions are true, given the dispositions of each and every beholder.

This, I think, is a false dichotomy, because it neglects the purpose of the assessment. Assessments are done for certain reasons, according to certain criteria dictated by those reasons. Those criteria, in turn, are selected for certain reasons as well. Being clear about the purpose of the assessment stops the infinite regress of providing reasons for reasons. Some purposes of assessment demand a higher degree of impartiality and publicity of reasons than others. A review of a product on ENWorld has a different purpose than a review of a product one gives to one's friends, which necessitates a higher degree of impartiality and publicity of reasons and results, I think, in a differing degree of objectivity.

Umbran’s post was spot on, precisely because it ties obsolescence with purpose. Can the game still do what it was designed to do and what its users/players want it to do? Since one of the purposes of games is to allow its players to have fun, then as long as there are people playing the game and having fun then it's hard to say that game is obsolete, at least for that purpose. Given that there are other purposes/functions of games (simulation, expanding the hobby, sparking imagination), it would seem that games could become obsolete when they no longer serve those purposes.

 

[diaglo]

I can't agree with this. Doesn't matter the number of people still playing a game: look at diaglo for instance: He plays OD&D, doesn't he? So the game is still in use, even if that's a half dozen guys judged "deluded" by the majority of gamers. Some people still play RIFTS, or RuneQuest, or the old Talislanta, or whatever games we can think of, unless maybe if they were, from the very start, fatally flawed in their design.

yes, i am currently refereeing an OD&D(1974) campaign. over a year old and still going strong. next session is this sunday for anyone interested in joining.

diaglo "happy to be deluded since i am playing OD&D and those without a clue ain't" Ooi

 

[Odhanan]

Just one question then. Does that mean that since I can look up a club (and it isnt that hard) that is filled to the brim with members that insist on using their old 8-tracks, 8-tracks are therefore not obsolete by your definition?

On one hand, I guess that means 8-tracks aren't obsolete yet by this definition.

On the other hand, I can find a critera that seems objective when talking about something being obsolete or not. What is an 8-track made for? Restitute sound. Are there other devices restituting sound better than an 8-track to the point anyone, besides nostalgia, would favor this new device? Yes. Does it mean it is obsolete under this definition? Looks like it, since 99,99999% of people will tell you a CD records sound better than a 8-track, including those who still favor the 8-track.

Now the real question is: are people still playing OD&D or Stormbringer because they are nostalgic at heart? Most will tell you they believe this game they still play was never outdone in design instead.

Now, what is a game made for? Make people have fun, I'd say. What is the purpose of a role-playing game, then? To have people have fun while pretending to be someone else. But there are many variations through which one can reach this base purpose while using a RPG, as we all know. Does it mean one variation is better than the other? Is it inherently more fun for players to have stats + one hundred skills as compared to six attributes? Is it better to have six or three saving throws? Is it more fun for players to adventure in a dungeon, kill and loot stuff or to engage in immersive role-playing during hours?

Well, it depends on the tastes of the players, doesn't it? Not everyone has fun the exact same way under the exact same conditions. There isn't a perfect way to have fun like there could be a perfect way to record sound. So the idea of "progress" when speaking of ways to have fun is extremely subjective. IMO at least.

 

[diaglo]

Just one question then. Does that mean that since I can look up a club (and it isnt that hard) that is filled to the brim with members that insist on using their old 8-tracks, 8-tracks are therefore not obsolete by your definition?

i still listen to my 8 tracks at work.

 

[WayneLigon]

I think it mostly is evolution. At least it usually is. I consider a game with a skill system an improvement over a game that does not have one. I consider a game that has made an effort to consolidate and simplify rules systems to be an improvement. I consider a game that addresses more 'mature' or 'advanced' concerns (out of combat roleplaying, world building, giving an explanation for how and why certain rules are the way they are) to be an improvement. I consider a game that takes a metagaming look at itself (Monte's various descriptions of the nuts and bolts behind 3E rules design begin an example, or M&M 2E's 'Under the Hood' sidebars) to be an improvement.