Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Videogame Influences!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TwinBahamut" data-source="post: 4596549" data-attributes="member: 32536"><p>I agree with you 100% here.</p><p></p><p>Someone who hides behind the "feels like a videogame" argument and thinks it is unassailable is almost always simply trying to make an attack without having to defend or explain it. In many ways, it is an inherently meaningless statement, since no one other than the speaker can possibly know what it means. What is more, it is almost <em>always</em> possible to get something much more specific out of the argument.</p><p></p><p>For example, SHARK has a specific "homogenized classes" argument that is more specific than the "feels like a videogame" argument. For him, he would be 100% better off just complaining about homogenization, and ignoring the videogame complaint entirely. After all, it is fairly clear that 4E is more homogenized than 3E. It is <em>not</em> clear that videogames tend to be more homogenous than tabletop RPGs. In fact, I disagree with the latter comment entirely. Many videogames can be wildly non-homogenous, with classes working on entirely different premises.</p><p></p><p>For example, <em>Final Fantasy Tactics</em> has a wild mix of classes that rely entirely on basic attacks, classes that balance out strong attacks with a longer "cast" time, classes that balance attacks with MP cost, classes that balance strength with added randomness and unreliability (to an absurd degree), classes with attacks that are free but require tactical positioning, classes that potentially hurt allies in a range of effect at MP cost, classes that hurt every enemy at no risk to your allies at no MP cost (but instead have a unique continuous fire sub-system), classes with abilities that are limited by inventory rather than anything character-based, and some classes that just get all-powerful attacks that hit range, come out instantly, and kill everything for free (I'm looking at you, Orlandu). There is nothing nicely packed together and homogenized about it. In fact, it is deliberately wildly unbalanced, so some characters and classes are clearly superior to others in every way. In another game, <em>Final Fantasy VI</em>, each individual character has a totally unique special ability that has its own game subsystem, and the characters have wildly different abilities and capabilities. </p><p></p><p>And the "homogenized" argument <em>completely</em> breaks down when you realize that many games don't even have characters or classes, so homogenization of these characters and classes doesn't even make sense. <em>Tetris</em> is a classic example.</p><p></p><p>What is more, many classic tabletop RPGs <em>are</em> homogenized. Pretty much every point-buy system like HERO <em>has</em> to be homogenized in order to even function. It simply doesn't work as a comparison of "videogame feel" vs. "not videogame feel", because homogenized or not has nothing to do with the inherent differences between videogames and tabletop RPGs.</p><p></p><p>It is always like this. Someone claims that something has a "videogame feel", but they really mean something much more specific that does not really have a necessary link to videogames at all. If they want to complain about something, they should complain about the specific thing they don't like, not try to lump it up as the "negative influence of videogames" or that "terrible videogame feel". After all, using the "videogame feel" as a scapegoat for not liking something only assures that no one will understand your complaint and that you indirectly (or directly) insult the videogame hobby as being inferior or damaging to tabletop RPGs.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, if SHARK simply tried to express dissatisfaction that 4E is a bit too homogenized, I may very well agree with him. After all, it <em>is</em> a bit too homogenized for my taste. However, the way he phrases that argument, through the "videogame feel", does nothing but alienate me and lead to more confusion and hostile discussion, in which everyone dodges the main point of discussion (homogenization) and instead argues about videogames and every other complaint about 4E under the sun. That is why complaining about "videogame feel" contributes nothing and just causes flame wars. I'm honestly surprised that complaint hasn't been permanently banned from ENWorld yet.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TwinBahamut, post: 4596549, member: 32536"] I agree with you 100% here. Someone who hides behind the "feels like a videogame" argument and thinks it is unassailable is almost always simply trying to make an attack without having to defend or explain it. In many ways, it is an inherently meaningless statement, since no one other than the speaker can possibly know what it means. What is more, it is almost [i]always[/i] possible to get something much more specific out of the argument. For example, SHARK has a specific "homogenized classes" argument that is more specific than the "feels like a videogame" argument. For him, he would be 100% better off just complaining about homogenization, and ignoring the videogame complaint entirely. After all, it is fairly clear that 4E is more homogenized than 3E. It is [i]not[/i] clear that videogames tend to be more homogenous than tabletop RPGs. In fact, I disagree with the latter comment entirely. Many videogames can be wildly non-homogenous, with classes working on entirely different premises. For example, [i]Final Fantasy Tactics[/i] has a wild mix of classes that rely entirely on basic attacks, classes that balance out strong attacks with a longer "cast" time, classes that balance attacks with MP cost, classes that balance strength with added randomness and unreliability (to an absurd degree), classes with attacks that are free but require tactical positioning, classes that potentially hurt allies in a range of effect at MP cost, classes that hurt every enemy at no risk to your allies at no MP cost (but instead have a unique continuous fire sub-system), classes with abilities that are limited by inventory rather than anything character-based, and some classes that just get all-powerful attacks that hit range, come out instantly, and kill everything for free (I'm looking at you, Orlandu). There is nothing nicely packed together and homogenized about it. In fact, it is deliberately wildly unbalanced, so some characters and classes are clearly superior to others in every way. In another game, [i]Final Fantasy VI[/i], each individual character has a totally unique special ability that has its own game subsystem, and the characters have wildly different abilities and capabilities. And the "homogenized" argument [i]completely[/i] breaks down when you realize that many games don't even have characters or classes, so homogenization of these characters and classes doesn't even make sense. [i]Tetris[/i] is a classic example. What is more, many classic tabletop RPGs [i]are[/i] homogenized. Pretty much every point-buy system like HERO [i]has[/i] to be homogenized in order to even function. It simply doesn't work as a comparison of "videogame feel" vs. "not videogame feel", because homogenized or not has nothing to do with the inherent differences between videogames and tabletop RPGs. It is always like this. Someone claims that something has a "videogame feel", but they really mean something much more specific that does not really have a necessary link to videogames at all. If they want to complain about something, they should complain about the specific thing they don't like, not try to lump it up as the "negative influence of videogames" or that "terrible videogame feel". After all, using the "videogame feel" as a scapegoat for not liking something only assures that no one will understand your complaint and that you indirectly (or directly) insult the videogame hobby as being inferior or damaging to tabletop RPGs. Honestly, if SHARK simply tried to express dissatisfaction that 4E is a bit too homogenized, I may very well agree with him. After all, it [i]is[/i] a bit too homogenized for my taste. However, the way he phrases that argument, through the "videogame feel", does nothing but alienate me and lead to more confusion and hostile discussion, in which everyone dodges the main point of discussion (homogenization) and instead argues about videogames and every other complaint about 4E under the sun. That is why complaining about "videogame feel" contributes nothing and just causes flame wars. I'm honestly surprised that complaint hasn't been permanently banned from ENWorld yet. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Videogame Influences!
Top