Why Jargon is Bad, and Some Modern Resources for RPG Theory

[Guest 7034872]

There was a thread on here back a few months ago in which many members complained that the jargon of "sandboxes" and "railroads" was largely unhelpful because "linear" ≠ "railroad" and "open-world" ≠ "sandbox," which is true. Matt Colville spoke on this eloquently and clearly in his "Running the Game" YouTube series:


P.S.: This is why I say Snarf Zagyg is right and jargon is bad: all too often, all too many people use the jargon thinking they mean one thing by it when in fact it doesn't mean that at all. Even worse, many, many of us use jargon thinking its meaning as we use it is consistent and clear, but on careful analysis it turns out to be neither. At least with plain speech and writing we know reasonably well (1) what each term means, and (2) that it does in fact mean something in the first place.

 

[Malmuria]

I think that the sociology of gameplay isn't necessarily relevant to technical questions of game design

The same thing could be said about recipes. Good chefs are inventing new recipes all the time, but not with the goal of changing the basic social logic of food, eating, dining out, etc. That doesn't mean that no chef has ever developed anything new.

A restaurant like Noma seems to certainly have produced innovative dishes, but their ethos of using highly local, highly seasonal ingredients was developed as a response to the problematics of industrial scale food production and agricultural monocultures (and all that is the latest version of a reaction that has happened in waves since the 19th. c.). Or, we can look at how the gourmet food “scene” in places like LA and New York has increasingly reflected the cultural diversity of those cities. Or, how the entire industry has changed in response to the rise of celebrity chef driven restaurants, reality tv, and new media like youtube.

Point is, innovations at the high end of “practical” arts especially—food, fashion, architecture, etc—cannot in my view be easily bracketed off from a) their historical influences and b) social context. So I think social context is absolutely relevant to understanding design, game or otherwise.

 

[Malmuria]

There was a thread on here back a few months ago in which many members complained that the jargon of "sandboxes" and "railroads" was largely unhelpful because "linear" ≠ "railroad" and "open-world" ≠ "sandbox," which is true. Matt Colville spoke on this eloquently and clearly in his "Running the Game" YouTube series:


P.S.: This is why I say Snarf Zagyg is right and jargon is bad: all too often, all too many people use the jargon thinking they mean one thing by it when in fact it doesn't mean that at all. Even worse, many, many of us use jargon thinking its meaning as we use it is consistent and clear, but on careful analysis it turns out to be neither. At least with plain speech and writing we know reasonably well (1) what each term means, and (2) that it does in fact mean something in the first place.

Justin Alexander had a good point about these videos on twitter. Among some other things, he wrote

If you decide that a sandbox should just describe any instance of player agency, you would then have two terms for player agency and no term for campaigns where players control scenario selection

Similarly for railroad: if you want railroad to refer to any instance of “gm-authored” fiction (setting, NPCs), then it would be helpful to have another term for what a GM does when they actively constrain player agency and negate player choices, within, even, a linear scenario.

 

[pemerton]

A restaurant like Noma seems to certainly have produced innovative dishes, but their ethos of using highly local, highly seasonal ingredients was developed as a response to the problematics of industrial scale food production and agricultural monocultures (and all that is the latest version of a reaction that has happened in waves since the 19th. c.). Or, we can look at how the gourmet food “scene” in places like LA and New York has increasingly reflected the cultural diversity of those cities.

Perhaps the intended "typically" shouldn't have been elided.

Most cultural artefacts reflect the culture in which they are created. But they don't typically set out to change it. The avant garde are sometimes an exception. Most cultural artefacts aren't in the avant garde. And setting out to change things isn't to change them.

But if I wanted to understand what the technical developments have been in filmmaking since Citizen Kane, I wouldn't read a social history of the avant garde. I'd read a book about technical developments in filmmaking.

 

[overgeeked]

Justin Alexander had a good point about these videos on twitter. Among some other things, he wrote

Similarly for railroad: if you want railroad to refer to any instance of “gm-authored” fiction (setting, NPCs), then it would be helpful to have another term for what a GM does when they actively constrain player agency and negate player choices, within, even, a linear scenario.

I think Justin is “misreading” the video. Sandbox is not “any instance of player agency”. Matt addresses this in the videos. He’s specific that these are how video game designers use these terms.

Sandbox (in video games) is player ability to select “off menu” as it were. To solve problems in ways the designers didn’t imagine. It’s a particular kind of player agency. A close synonym common to RPGs would be shenanigans. To use objects, spells, and abilities in unforeseen ways. That is only one kind of agency. Others include agency in character creation. Agency in actions taken. Agency in words spoken. Etc.

Open world (in video games) is the ability to go anywhere, to select your own goals. It’s what people in RPGs commonly refer to as a sandbox. Hence the confusion.

And that’s not how Matt defines railroad in those videos. So I’m not sure where Justin’s pulling that from. Matt is specific that railroading means denial of player agency in regards to shenanigans and/or path. He’s very specific about the difference between railroad and linear adventure.

 

[Malmuria]

I think Justin is “misreading” the video. Sandbox is not “any instance of player agency”. Matt addresses this in the videos. He’s specific that these are how video game designers use these terms.

Sandbox (in video games) is player ability to select “off menu” as it were. To solve problems in ways the designers didn’t imagine. It’s a particular kind of player agency. A close synonym common to RPGs would be shenanigans. To use objects, spells, and abilities in unforeseen ways. That is only one kind of agency. Others include agency in character creation. Agency in actions taken. Agency in words spoken. Etc.

Open world (in video games) is the ability to go anywhere, to select your own goals. It’s what people in RPGs commonly refer to as a sandbox. Hence the confusion.

And that’s not how Matt defines railroad in those videos. So I’m not sure where Justin’s pulling that from. Matt is specific that railroading means denial of player agency in regards to shenanigans and/or path. He’s very specific about the difference between railroad and linear adventure.

I think his point would be that we still need another word for players choosing the scenario to engage with

 

[overgeeked]

I think his point would be that we still need another word for players choosing the scenario to engage with

No, we don't need more jargon.

 

[Ovinomancer]

No, we don't need more jargon.

Right, player agency is sufficiently okay, but no new jargon!

Oh, and sandbox. Have to keep that one. But no more!

 

[Malmuria]

No, we don't need more jargon.

I don’t care about the jargon necessarily, but aren’t those meaningfully separate things? For example, a hexcrawl where you can go to any hex, or a game where you have to go specifically to the dungeon at hex 6, but once there you can problem solve in any way you can think of.

 

[overgeeked]

I don’t care about the jargon necessarily, but aren’t those meaningfully separate things? For example, a hexcrawl where you can go to any hex, or a game where you have to go specifically to the dungeon at hex 6, but once there you can problem solve in any way you can think of.

Open world vs closed world.

Open world lets you go to any hex.

Closed world means your choices are spam or spam.

That's how they're used in video games at least.