Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5407586" data-attributes="member: 4937">False analogy, as your own elaboration makes clear.&nbsp; Still there is a kernal of truth, in that in both a complete WWII simulation and a Sandbox, the designer includes alot of detail not simply because he expects it to be relevant, but because he is trying to simulate something and isn't sure from game to game what will be relevant.&nbsp;&nbsp; The drive or desire for completeness and not merely that the situation be boiled down to a small set of essentials only, is driving not only the desire for a WWII simulation that has Delaware on the map but also an RPG that has a random prostitute encounter table.&nbsp; It's there not because you expect to need it, but because it is there.&nbsp;- emphasis addedTherein lies the problem with your analogy.&nbsp; If a roleplaying game is infinite in scope, then the question never becomes one of 'replay value' (as it were), since in theory we could continue in the same game forever.&nbsp;&nbsp; In a wargame, for a given tactical scale and operational theater, we can say that the game is 'completely described'.&nbsp; But the game world of a roleplaying game can never be completely described.&nbsp; The game world is too vast, the interaction with it too detailed, and it is indeed effectively (and sometimes explicitly) infinite.Procedurely generated material is sandbox in spades.&nbsp; You need a 100,000 widget random generator not because you expect the players to encounter 100,000 widgets, but because it represents the range of what you imagine could be there.&nbsp;&nbsp; You might only need 6, but you prep for infinity.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5407586, member: 4937"] False analogy, as your own elaboration makes clear. Still there is a kernal of truth, in that in both a complete WWII simulation and a Sandbox, the designer includes alot of detail not simply because he expects it to be relevant, but because he is trying to simulate something and isn't sure from game to game what will be relevant. The drive or desire for completeness and not merely that the situation be boiled down to a small set of essentials only, is driving not only the desire for a WWII simulation that has Delaware on the map but also an RPG that has a random prostitute encounter table. It's there not because you expect to need it, but because it is there. - emphasis added Therein lies the problem with your analogy. If a roleplaying game is infinite in scope, then the question never becomes one of 'replay value' (as it were), since in theory we could continue in the same game forever. In a wargame, for a given tactical scale and operational theater, we can say that the game is 'completely described'. But the game world of a roleplaying game can never be completely described. The game world is too vast, the interaction with it too detailed, and it is indeed effectively (and sometimes explicitly) infinite. Procedurely generated material is sandbox in spades. You need a 100,000 widget random generator not because you expect the players to encounter 100,000 widgets, but because it represents the range of what you imagine could be there. You might only need 6, but you prep for infinity. [/QUOTE]

Verification