What does Videogamey mean to you?

[jaerdaph]

What would be the "controller" counterpart in football?

This chick:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNmPybFK2_o&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Cat fighting gets ugly during BYU vs. New Mexico women's soccer match[/ame]



In "Old School" terms, she'd just be a Queen of the Demonweb Pits.

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's a package of things, and often people who say it don't know exactly why they think that.

Clearly, given my pet project, I don't have any problem with something that seems "videogamey."

 

[SteveC]

Sadly, it's become synonymous with "something I don't like and don't understand particularly well." As a result, it's a term I try and avoid. It's also a symptom that a discussion thread is heading south.

 

[xechnao]

snip

Yeah, I think I see what you mean. You say (video)gamey means that the game's design presumes a very clear goal for the player -a goal that seems independent from anything but certain rules. The goal's obviousness is so high as the amount of rules the player has to figure out.

I kind of agree with this but I mostly blame for gameness' feeling a gamey design of the rules -a design that wants to respect certain limits, such as the output of your computer display and the input of your keyboard -or a board where you place miniatures. A fighter that is fast and has a good chance to successfully engage enemies before they can change their tactical position feels different than a fighter with initiative X and movement of y squares. Now, if rules are like the ones in the second case, the more rules there are the more difficult to adjust them beyond their apparent limitations. So, this is where I think what you say holds true.

 

[Remathilis]

What would be examples of something that is "novelesque", which is absent in something "videogamey"?

Hmmm...

Strict limits on magic might be one. Novelesque magic tends to be less showy and much harder to use, its effects more devastating, and typically its in the hands of the bad guys. Videogamey magic is flashy, easy to use, balanced against other types of attacks (or tries to be) and available to good-guys as well. The comparison would be in a Conan novel, only evil and vile magicians ever use magic, vs. Final Fantasy, were all the heroes can (and do) learn magic.

Another example would be treasure: Novelesque magic items are powerful, few in number, and named (Excalibur, Stormbringer, Sting). Videogamey magic items are common, start weak and upgrade, and rarely given anything more than a descriptive title (ring of protection, sword +1).

By these arguements you could say D&D has equal amounts of both traits. You'd be correct. Arguing one part of D&D is videogamey is kinda like ranting that your foot isn't a hand.

 

[ggroy]

Strict limits on magic might be one. Novelesque magic tends to be less showy and much harder to use, its effects more devastating, and typically its in the hands of the bad guys. Videogamey magic is flashy, easy to use, balanced against other types of attacks (or tries to be) and available to good-guys as well. The comparison would be in a Conan novel, only evil and vile magicians ever use magic, vs. Final Fantasy, were all the heroes can (and do) learn magic.

Another example would be treasure: Novelesque magic items are powerful, few in number, and named (Excalibur, Stormbringer, Sting). Videogamey magic items are common, start weak and upgrade, and rarely given anything more than a descriptive title (ring of protection, sword +1).

These sound like the difference between a low/rare magic world (novelesque) and a high/abundent magic world (videogamey).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In my group, "videogamey" means 2 things.

For my buddies- most of whom are in the computer programming biz, some who are game programmers- it means things like "marking" that remind them of the MMORPGs they love so much.

For me, who plays no MMORPGs at all, it means things like "healing surges" that remind me of combat games like Tekken or Mortal Kombat.

In either case, it refers to elements that, while we may enjoy them in our favorite electronic time-wasters, we find to fall flat at our gaming table.

 

[ggroy]

In the novelesque vs. videogamey dichotomy with respect to magic, in principle one can trying turning something like 4E into something more "low magic" by doing something like:

- make the magic items and treasure a lot more rare, and strip out the magic enhancement bonuses from magic weapons (ie. +1, +2, etc ...)
- redo the wizard, sorcerer, etc ... spellcasting classes such that they only have dailies, with Vancian style spell slots (as in older editions).

In order to preserve the 4E math scaling up by the levels, just use +level in place of the to-hit modifiers (ie. +level/2 + magic enhancement + primary stat adjustment) for combat powers. (Some of the monster hit points will have to be adjusted accordingly).

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

I've always felt that "videogamey" was a continuum. Particularly regarding player options, where the more and more a player was restricted in what the character could do based on a finite list of defined actions and an economy of actions per turn . . . then the game has become ever more videogamey.

 

[Pig Champion]

Hmmm...

Strict limits on magic might be one. Novelesque magic tends to be less showy and much harder to use, its effects more devastating, and typically its in the hands of the bad guys. Videogamey magic is flashy, easy to use, balanced against other types of attacks (or tries to be) and available to good-guys as well. The comparison would be in a Conan novel, only evil and vile magicians ever use magic, vs. Final Fantasy, were all the heroes can (and do) learn magic.

Just to point out, FF is Japanese and as such magic is looked upon in a kind of Taoist way. The reason magic is so freely accessible and everywhere is because in most Eastern video games magic = qi.