Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7769223">This is a fine comparison of older vs newer games, with no discernible value judgement on either one, which is great and I'm totally with you.This is an accurate statement of things that have been removed or adjusted in newer editions.DANGER WILL ROBINSON!!While your prior two paragraphs were fine comparisons or accurate statements of how new games have changed, this statement is a value judgement.&nbsp; A personal opinion that because of those other things the result is now a reduction in enjoyment of the game.Well, this presents a logical problem: a reduction in the enjoyment to whom?&nbsp; Clearly to you of course, but that's the same problem present in the OP.&nbsp; The OP clearly doesn't like NS gaming.&nbsp; It's less fun to him.&nbsp; But what about everyone else?&nbsp; If this thread is demonstrative of anything then it at least shows the sentiment is not universal, and I'm certain some of those with OS gaming history here may enjoy NS gaming even more.&nbsp; So we can't (neither you, or I) make any sort of generalized statement that &quot;due to these changes, there has been a reduction in fun&quot;.&nbsp; Here, let me use some graphs (assume Y is Fun and X is Time)Lets say this is OS gaming.&nbsp; High peaks, deep valleys.&nbsp; [ATTACH]104093[/ATTACH]And (using your definitions) lets say this is NS gaming, lower peaks and lower valleys.&nbsp; [ATTACH]104094[/ATTACH]It's possible (Han: Why don't you go find out?) this is true.What's just as possible, is that we're seeing this:[ATTACH]104095[/ATTACH]Or any other variety of combinations!&nbsp; We have absolutely ZERO factual basis to draw from that NS gaming is less fun than OS gaming.&nbsp; ZERO.&nbsp; Anecdotal evidence by select opinions?&nbsp; Sure.&nbsp; But we have anecdotal evidence for everything.&nbsp; Which is why it's generally considered worthless as evidence for anything.I read the rest but I'm not going to address it because it's not necessary.&nbsp; This is where the discussion breaks down, where the argument falls on it's face, because it's citations do not support its claims (or any claims really).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7769223"] This is a fine comparison of older vs newer games, with no discernible value judgement on either one, which is great and I'm totally with you. This is an accurate statement of things that have been removed or adjusted in newer editions. DANGER WILL ROBINSON!! While your prior two paragraphs were fine comparisons or accurate statements of how new games have changed, [I]this[/I] statement is a value judgement. A personal opinion that because of [I]those other things[/I] the result is now a reduction in enjoyment of the game. Well, this presents a logical problem: a reduction in the enjoyment [I]to whom[/I]? Clearly to you of course, but that's the same problem present in the OP. The OP clearly [I]doesn't like[/I] NS gaming. It's less fun to him. But what about everyone else? If this thread is demonstrative of [I]anything[/I] then it at least shows the sentiment is not universal, and I'm certain some of those with OS gaming history here may enjoy NS gaming even more. So we can't (neither you, or I) make any sort of generalized statement that "due to these changes, there has been a reduction in fun". Here, let me use some graphs (assume Y is Fun and X is Time) Lets say this is OS gaming. High peaks, deep valleys. [ATTACH=CONFIG]104093[/ATTACH] And (using your definitions) lets say this is NS gaming, lower peaks and lower valleys. [ATTACH=CONFIG]104094[/ATTACH] It's [I]possible[/I] (Han: Why don't you go find out?) this is true. What's just as possible, is that we're seeing this: [ATTACH=CONFIG]104095[/ATTACH] Or any other variety of combinations! We have absolutely ZERO factual basis to draw from that NS gaming is [I]less fun[/I] than OS gaming. ZERO. Anecdotal evidence by select opinions? Sure. But we have anecdotal evidence for [I]everything[/I]. Which is why it's generally considered worthless as evidence for [I]anything.[/I] I read the rest but I'm not going to address it because it's not necessary. This is where the discussion breaks down, where the argument falls on it's face, because it's citations do not support its claims (or any claims really). [/QUOTE]

Verification