Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 8241334" data-attributes="member: 85555"><p>But this is a problem (and you see this in all kinds of criticism and analysis of things). You enjoy something, someone points out some pattern in it, and then anytime you sense that, you no longer enjoy it. A good example of this is the over-use of 'don't use passive voice'. It sort of becomes people trying to be the smartest person in the room all the time, and reacting per formatively to a thing, rather than just feeling their own genuine reaction to something and reporting it. Suddenly people react negatively when they encounter it, whether it would have added to their enjoyment, been neutral, or taken away. Or like when people complained about lens flair a few years ago in movies. No one noticed, someone mentions it, and suddenly people are actively avoiding it and re-acting negative. This isn't to say the Alexandrian wasn't observing something legitimate. I think he was, and I think his analysis was useful. The problem was more in how his analysis became a bit of a fad among those of us who were critical of 5E and we over-applied it. If there are a bit of dissociative mechanics in something and I don't even notice them, and perhaps they even add to my enjoyment, there isn't a problem: the problem is the lens I am bringing to analyzing the game that is based around active avoidance of dissociative mechanics. The real question to ask is when something like that becomes a problem for you in a game (and that isn't always easy to answer)</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 8241334, member: 85555"] But this is a problem (and you see this in all kinds of criticism and analysis of things). You enjoy something, someone points out some pattern in it, and then anytime you sense that, you no longer enjoy it. A good example of this is the over-use of 'don't use passive voice'. It sort of becomes people trying to be the smartest person in the room all the time, and reacting per formatively to a thing, rather than just feeling their own genuine reaction to something and reporting it. Suddenly people react negatively when they encounter it, whether it would have added to their enjoyment, been neutral, or taken away. Or like when people complained about lens flair a few years ago in movies. No one noticed, someone mentions it, and suddenly people are actively avoiding it and re-acting negative. This isn't to say the Alexandrian wasn't observing something legitimate. I think he was, and I think his analysis was useful. The problem was more in how his analysis became a bit of a fad among those of us who were critical of 5E and we over-applied it. If there are a bit of dissociative mechanics in something and I don't even notice them, and perhaps they even add to my enjoyment, there isn't a problem: the problem is the lens I am bringing to analyzing the game that is based around active avoidance of dissociative mechanics. The real question to ask is when something like that becomes a problem for you in a game (and that isn't always easy to answer) [/QUOTE]

Verification