AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Gamist vs simulationist vs storyist3/18/2023 ![]() Mechanics-Heavy: This is simple-what quantity of mechanics are there, and how often do they enter into the game? Unfortunately, it doesn't capture all of the nuances, which is what the next category is for. ![]() (Also, your ultimate end is much more likely to be better if all your scenes turned out similarly for you-all bad or all good.) Fiasco is abstract: the only resolution is whether a scene turns out poorly or well for your character, and that's limited because half of the scenes must turn out poorly, half turn out well. ![]() GURPS is concrete: mechanics are geared towards a physical representation of the fiction (although some abstraction, such as hitpoints, still exists). Concrete games use mechanics which engage with the tangible elements of the fiction, while abstract games use mechanics which engage with the intangibles-characters' feelings, ethics, and also the more "meta" levels of the story situation and the narrative itself. Derivative, because I have yet to run across a game which doesn't have both parts. Abstract: This pair is the most spectrum-ish of them all, even moreso than Experimental vs. The more actions and risks players take, the riskier it is to take action.Ĭoncrete vs. Dread is a great example: it uses a Jenga tower as the source of difficulty in the game. While they're technically derivative (because they have their roots in prior games), they don't always borrow heavily. Experimental games might completely redefine many of the assumptions that underly derivative games. e.g., if a game has the Big Six Stats and its core resolution is "when you take an action, use the appropriate stat and roll against a difficulty value", it's a derivative-a large number of games on the market are like this, since it's a simpler thing to take a derivative ruleset and make it more robust. What I mean by it, however, is a game whose rules are evolved and developed mostly from a prior game's rules. Derivative: I wish I had a better word than "derivative", because it so frequently has negative connotations. Because indie games are focused on finding a specific niche of gamers (as opposed to a game like D&D, which targets a broad swath of gamers), they can afford to be more unorthodox in their mechanics.Įxperimental vs. Hollywood" distinction of movies, this classification tends to coincide with "innovative vs. "games coming from small-press companies". "Indie": This usually tends to boil down to "games related to big companies" vs. They're all tools in a toolbox, some of which are less useful than others, many of which are useful for different reasons. So to what extent are traditional games and Indie-style Story games the same thing? At what point does something cease to be a Roleplaying game? Or do different people have different ideas about what a Roleplaying game is and can be?Įchoing prior posters: classifying games in a specific way does nothing more than filtering your data in a particular way. The more i've seen of Indy games the more i've begun to realise just how different they are not just in terms of mechanics, but also in terms of goal and objective, and in the kind of experience they are trying to generate. One thing that interests me particularly is the distinction between traditional and Indie gameing. Which games are related to each other, and which inspired which? What are the essential games in each school of RPG design? How should we classify RPGs? In terms of play style, Gamist vs Narrativist? In terms of character creation options, Class Based vs Skill based? In terms of Setting, Sci-Fi vs Fantasy, Horror vs Gritty action? So having enjoyed reading the kind of tangental discussion about this in one of the other threads lets open it to the floor.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |