Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8628693" data-attributes="member: 71699">Yes, I agree. It's interesting to observe that there can be incompatibilities within an agenda.That's the essential point I wanted to make. If gamist is about challenge, it is equally gamist to prefer low challenge as high. Challenge is a very, very general term though, and there isn't anything like the deconstruction of narrativism to say what in game will amount to effective and engaging rather than ineffective and unengaging challenge. Nothing about what gamism needs to be.I find it really hard to frame this into words. Perhaps it would be analogous to having a description in the theory about narrativism that said folk want to tell stories. There need to be characters, situations, etc. But nothing about dramatic character development or resolution of premise. Nothing about what makes a an effective and engaging story. Nothing about what story needs to be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 8628693, member: 71699"] Yes, I agree. It's interesting to observe that there can be incompatibilities [I]within[/I] an agenda. That's the essential point I wanted to make. If gamist is about challenge, it is equally gamist to prefer low challenge as high. Challenge is a very, very general term though, and there isn't anything like the deconstruction of narrativism to say what in game will amount to effective and engaging rather than ineffective and unengaging challenge. Nothing about what gamism needs to be. I find it really hard to frame this into words. Perhaps it would be analogous to having a description in the theory about narrativism that said folk want to tell stories. There need to be characters, situations, etc. But nothing about dramatic character development or resolution of premise. Nothing about what makes a an effective and engaging story. Nothing about what story needs to be. [/QUOTE]

Verification