Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 4994534" data-attributes="member: 22779">Except for one very salient point which you glossed over.The players, through the use of twists, can resolve any conflict at any point in time to their own benefit.&nbsp; Twists uber ales is a quote you missed (look under the conflicts chapter).For example, an Old Worlder, with no technological advances or gadgets is faced by a battle mech armed with weapons capable of blowing a ship out of orbit from the ground.&nbsp; The old worlder is a PC and the battle mech is an NPC.The Old Worlder wins EVERY SINGLE TIME.&nbsp; He simply uses his twists and the mech pilot loses.&nbsp; NO MATTER WHAT.&nbsp; Now, the twists might cost him something down the road, but, for this particular scenario, the Old Worlder wins every time.&nbsp; There is no unknown.&nbsp; He's a PC, he wins.&nbsp; End of story.The idea that you must have a win condition to have a game is just wrong.&nbsp; Take a video game where, the longer you play, the more difficult it becomes until it becomes so difficult you cannot win.&nbsp; You know the end result of starting this game every single time.I suppose the arguement could be made that survival time is the win condition, but, that's outside of the game.&nbsp; The game itself doesn't measure that.&nbsp; There's no survival clock in Pacman or in a pinball game.&nbsp; &quot;Beat my last score&quot; might be a goal that the player comes up with for himself, but, that's the player deciding a win condition, not the game.&nbsp; &quot;Keep this going as long as possible&quot; is certainly a style of play for lots and lots of games.&nbsp; For Sufficiently Advanced, you have the same thing.&nbsp; How long can the players keep the scenario going before someone hits the eject button and takes the story in a totally different direction?If that qualifies as your win condition, I suppose then that's fair enough.But, pulling quotes out of context of a text you've barely read is not proving your point RC.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 4994534, member: 22779"] Except for one very salient point which you glossed over. The players, through the use of twists, can resolve any conflict at any point in time to their own benefit. Twists uber ales is a quote you missed (look under the conflicts chapter). For example, an Old Worlder, with no technological advances or gadgets is faced by a battle mech armed with weapons capable of blowing a ship out of orbit from the ground. The old worlder is a PC and the battle mech is an NPC. The Old Worlder wins EVERY SINGLE TIME. He simply uses his twists and the mech pilot loses. NO MATTER WHAT. Now, the twists might cost him something down the road, but, for this particular scenario, the Old Worlder wins every time. There is no unknown. He's a PC, he wins. End of story. The idea that you must have a win condition to have a game is just wrong. Take a video game where, the longer you play, the more difficult it becomes until it becomes so difficult you cannot win. You know the end result of starting this game every single time. I suppose the arguement could be made that survival time is the win condition, but, that's outside of the game. The game itself doesn't measure that. There's no survival clock in Pacman or in a pinball game. "Beat my last score" might be a goal that the player comes up with for himself, but, that's the player deciding a win condition, not the game. "Keep this going as long as possible" is certainly a style of play for lots and lots of games. For Sufficiently Advanced, you have the same thing. How long can the players keep the scenario going before someone hits the eject button and takes the story in a totally different direction? If that qualifies as your win condition, I suppose then that's fair enough. But, pulling quotes out of context of a text you've barely read is not proving your point RC. [/QUOTE]

Verification