Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="PrecociousApprentice" data-source="post: 4237398" data-attributes="member: 61449">This is why I still have a problem with the GNS theory. You are assuming that the game mechanics actually exist from a character's perspective, and like any natural law, can be discovered by them. This to me is the only way to explain why anyone has a hard time with aligning their fluff and crunch. Simulationist gaming has become such a catch all that it is losing any meaning, and people then keep throwing out simulationist to mean "a player or game that equates game mechanics with the physics of the world." This may be a valid interpretation of simulationist, but is not the only way to interpret it. Some simulationists might be the "internally consistent ruleset" type. Others could be the "ruleset should not only accomodate but encourage and facilitate a certain genre/theme/literary world." I do not think that either of these types of simulationists would inherently have a problem with rules being in your face. They would also take different stances on when and how the rules are interpreted. When a term is used for many different things, some of which can be opposite and contradictory, the term loses a great deal of power. In this you are partially right. If you insist that the rules have to spoon feed you the fluff that is realistic enough for your tastes, then yes. It does depend on that. If you are able to let the mechanics guide the narration of their result in game fluff, but not require that the fluff be the actual output of the mechaincs, then no. How well this analogy works is not dependent on how much "realism" you need. I need a lot of "realism" but I don't need my mechanics to give it to me. And strangely enough, someone whose opinion on the matter I greatly respect has recently told me that I am not necessarily the narrativost that I though, but an "illusionist' simulationist. I like the output focused (read exception based or black box) design paradigm.</blockquote>

Verification