Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 9145527" data-attributes="member: 71699">While I believe the notion of supervenience between game elements and world has some useful ramifications; like you I don't think it leads to any decisive test for what counts as diegetic. (It really just kicks the can down the road.) As I concluded in that very postOne way to retrieve usefulness for the term would be just to describe the local norm. If the local norm is that inspiration is something characters are aware of, then in that location inspiration is diegetic. One might not agree with its assignment, but at least the word has a clear meaning. It describes a kind of norm.As you pointed out, a designer can set out to prescribe the norms for their game. They can rule inspiration in as diegetic in their game, and ceteris paribus that would prevail. It fits views offered in other threads about the purposes of rules. And fits with notions like secondary design. (As a side effect, broadening [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER]'s observation on setting establishment to at least include designers.)NOTE EDITS</blockquote>