Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Immortal Sun" data-source="post: 7769247">The graph was meant to be taken as symbolic that games have ups and downs.&nbsp; It was not meant to be taken mathematically.&nbsp; Which is why in my next post to Lanefan, I argued against the inclusion of personal experiences that one game may have higher peaks and valleys or another may have more frequent peaks and more frequent valleys.But ALL games have ups and downs.&nbsp; Moments where you are enjoying yourself, moments where you aren't.&nbsp; Moments where you succeed, moments where you fail.&nbsp; And even times when the successes are not enjoyable, and the failures are.&nbsp; But they are still there.&nbsp; Highs and lows.Well, that's not entirely accurate.&nbsp; We don't have the data, true.&nbsp; That's not to say that it cannot be measured, and there are MANY metrics by which player enjoyment is measured.&nbsp; If it was impossible to measure if something is &quot;fun&quot; or not, then many of the biggest game companies (expanding this argument momentarily to include all games ever) would not be spending millions of dollars on beta testing, focus groups and experimental features.I think you're misunderstanding my argument.I'm arguing all games have highs and lows.&nbsp; If you disagree with that premise, you're more than welcome to, but by the sheer fact that a die has a high number and a low number, the games they're used in must likewise have high moments and low moments.&nbsp; Fun moments and un-fun moments.&nbsp; I would most certainly like to see, even an anecdotal argument that games do not have highs and lows.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Immortal Sun, post: 7769247"] The graph was meant to be taken as symbolic that games have ups and downs. It was not meant to be taken mathematically. Which is why in my next post to Lanefan, I argued against the inclusion of personal experiences that one game may have higher peaks and valleys or another may have more frequent peaks and more frequent valleys. But ALL games have ups and downs. Moments where you are enjoying yourself, moments where you aren't. Moments where you succeed, moments where you fail. And even times when the successes are not enjoyable, and the failures are. But they are still there. Highs and lows. Well, that's not entirely accurate. We don't have the data, true. That's not to say that it [I]cannot[/I] be measured, and there are MANY metrics by which player enjoyment is measured. If it was impossible to measure if something is "fun" or not, then many of the biggest game companies (expanding this argument momentarily to include all games ever) would not be spending millions of dollars on beta testing, focus groups and experimental features. I think you're misunderstanding my argument. I'm arguing all games have highs and lows. If you disagree with that premise, you're more than welcome to, but by the sheer fact that a die has a high number and a low number, the games they're used in must likewise have high moments and low moments. Fun moments and un-fun moments. I would most certainly like to see, even an anecdotal argument that games do [I]not[/I] have highs and lows. [/QUOTE]

Verification