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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8690442" data-attributes="member: 7026617">It isn't contradictory necessarily, but I quite disagree that its not something you should have known before if its your backpack.I don't disagree with this.  As I've noted, there are games that do things quite different and I'm good with most of them given context.But not everyone is.  And in some contexts, neither am I.  There's at least one person in this thread who's made it clear that he'd rather just avoid some genres of RPG specifically because to make them work right requires certain kinds of contrivance, and he'd simply rather not deal with those genres or styles of game if that's what's required because he finds it disruptive.I don't think repeating the reasons you don't find them disruptive--or in many cases I don't--is going to change his feelings on this.  He simply doesn't see it the same way.When it comes to something like this, I disagree.  If its a strong preference, its probably not something that's subject to reexamination in any meaningful way; if it changes slowly, largely as an element of other changes in personality or experience.As I noted very early in one of the earlier threads, I was much more strongly simulationist in the 70's and 80's.  That didn't change because people noted its impossibility on some levels or a number of other things people would do to criticize it as an approach.  It changed because some of the things that mattered to me stopped, over time, mattering as much.  I can't say there was no outside influence on this, but to the degree it was, it was because I progressively realized some things I wanted in the game just weren't compatible with a simulationist agenda, and others benefited from tools I was taking off the table too much for what I was keeping to avoid them to be worth it.  But all the people telling me my view was overly selective or a number of other things did was tell me they didn't see things as I did (and often came across as dimissive of that difference to boot).After all, in the end of the day, what parts of the experience are actually comparable in an apples-to-apples way is subjective.  That one thing seems relevant and the other doesn't, or to the contrary, is based on perspective, not any objective comparison that can be made.I'm just not convinced what you seem to be trying to do is productive here.  When the proper response to "But about these other apples..." is can very well be "They don't seem to be apples to me."  I can understand that engaging with them on their own level can be pretty much letting them beg the question here, but without that, you're arguing from a premise they simply don't share.</blockquote>

Verification