Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7769231">I think the specific mathematical function is irrelevant to the question.&nbsp; How often games have highs and lows is a table-to-table issue, not a NS/OS issue.&nbsp; What we can agree on is that all games will have highs, and all games will have lows.&nbsp; So, it behooves us to keep the variables minimal, and use the same functions for judging any game in a general context.&nbsp; If we start trying to introduce too many variables, especially highly questionable ones like &quot;OS games have more peaks, but deeper valleys&quot; or &quot;NS games have shallower valleys and fewer peaks&quot; we stop being able to have a discussion because we're injecting personal opinion and personal experience with NS/OS games.My overarching point was not to say that one thing or another is true or false, but to demonstrate that even though we have an X and Y parameter, we lack the data to accurately place the highs of OS gaming or the lows of NS gaming.Example: IMO, lots of peaks and lots of valleys does not produce a game I'm terribly interested in because it tends to be feel &quot;swingy&quot; and often lacks continuity, things I personally value in games.&nbsp; If every time I hit a valley I have to reroll, only to experience the same every other session or so, I get bored.&nbsp; Extremes of glory and failure are not entertaining to me.&nbsp; -SubEX: I have a DM who is very OS in his approach and his games are much as above and while I attempt to moderate success and failure as much as any player can, often the extremes are so extreme there is nothing at all you can do.&nbsp; Which becomes distressful, as it feels like my input into the game is meaningless, that my time spent making a character was a waste, and that any value I invest into them will be thrown in the trash.&nbsp; But yes I have many memorable glory moments from those games....but I'm not sure if on the whole the highs and the lows averaged together, produce a &quot;Yes I have fun in his game.&quot; answer.And I suppose, if anything, NS games are attempting to produce a &quot;Yes I have fun playing this game.&quot; answer, over a OS &quot;Yes I have some very memorable moments.&quot; answer.&nbsp; And I would continue on to posit that the reasoning behind this is that NS games want you to look at the game and say &quot;I have fun playing this.&quot; rather than needing to look at Bob's Table and say &quot;I had fun at Bob's Table.&quot;&nbsp; Designers can't guarantee that Bob will always hold a great session, but designers can at least to some extent, guarantee that their game will be fun to play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7769231"] I think the specific mathematical function is irrelevant to the question. How often games have highs and lows is a table-to-table issue, not a NS/OS issue. What we [I]can[/I] agree on is that all games will have highs, and all games will have lows. So, it behooves us to keep the variables minimal, and use the same functions for judging any game in a [I]general[/I] context. If we start trying to introduce too many variables, especially highly questionable ones like "OS games have more peaks, but deeper valleys" or "NS games have shallower valleys and fewer peaks" we stop being able to have a discussion because we're injecting personal opinion and personal experience with NS/OS games. My overarching point was not to say that one thing or another is true or false, but to demonstrate that even though we have an X and Y parameter, we lack the data to accurately place the highs of OS gaming or the lows of NS gaming. Example: IMO, lots of peaks and lots of valleys does not produce a game I'm terribly interested in because it tends to be feel "swingy" and often lacks continuity, things I [I]personally[/I] value in games. If every time I hit a valley I have to reroll, only to experience the same every other session or so, I get bored. Extremes of glory and failure are not entertaining to me. -SubEX: I have a DM who is very OS in his approach and his games are much as above and while I attempt to moderate success and failure as much as any player can, often the extremes are so extreme there is nothing at all you can do. Which becomes distressful, as it feels like my input into the game is meaningless, that my time spent making a character was a waste, and that any value I invest into them will be thrown in the trash. But yes I have many memorable glory moments from those games....but I'm not sure if [I]on the whole[/I] the highs and the lows averaged together, produce a "Yes I have fun in his game." answer. And I suppose, if anything, NS games are attempting to produce a "Yes I have fun playing this game." answer, over a OS "Yes I have some very memorable moments." answer. And I would continue on to posit that the reasoning behind this is that NS games want you to look at the [I]game[/I] and say "I have fun playing this." rather than needing to look at Bob's Table and say "I had fun at Bob's Table." Designers can't guarantee that Bob will always hold a great session, but designers [I]can[/I] at least to some extent, guarantee that their game will be fun to play. [/QUOTE]

Verification