Wtf Are You Playing? - The Classification Thread - The Bear and Badger

Tempy

K that's great I haven't read his posts ty for your input

ChattinWithChet

What I would like to add to this thing is to suggest that Metroid is far more Science Fiction than it is anything else and whatever its particular gameplay challenges are, I reckon this categorises it more effectively. As does putting Zelda in Fantasy.

WorKid

Minecraft is a German basket weaving sim.

dynamiteReady

ChattinWithChet wrote:

What I would like to add to this thing is to suggest that Metroid is far more Science Fiction than it is anything else and whatever its particular gameplay challenges are, I reckon this categorises it more effectively. As does putting Zelda in Fantasy.

That only tells you about the setting and story though, right?

Yossarian

dynamiteReady wrote:

ChattinWithChet wrote:

What I would like to add to this thing is to suggest that Metroid is far more Science Fiction than it is anything else and whatever its particular gameplay challenges are, I reckon this categorises it more effectively. As does putting Zelda in Fantasy.

That only tells you about the setting and story though, right?

Indeed, by far the least important aspect of any game IMO.

dynamiteReady

Depends on who's playing though...

And it always fascinates me to see how computer based RPG are predominately fantasy based...
But fuck this thread, seriously. I just wanted a little discussion about this very subject, and related ones... Only for it to turn into a political sideshow...

You smell me?Â

But I did predict this.Â

As did others, to be fair.

Tempy

D&D

Yossarian

dynamiteReady wrote:

Depends on who's playing though.

No, my opinion doesn't depend on who's playing.

Tempy

dynamiteReady wrote:

Only for it to turn into a political sideshow...

I was just trying to engage you in discussion in response to you calling me a thread cancelling Nazi, by responding in full with my opinions etc and why I believe the idea of classifyingÂ games is redundant. That's reasonable, surely? That's within theÂ remitÂ of the thread? I skimmed the earlier stuff so missed precisely what Jon had said, but y'know, I was just trying to do the whole discussion thing.

I feel i'd have been better just carrying on folding tshirts.

Rev

RPG is an incorrect term anyways.
Role playing game could be put against any game with a slight story. You are playing a role.
Maybe character levelling game is more appropriate?

Yossarian

revelthedog wrote:

RPG is an incorrect term anyways. Role playing game could be put against any game with a slight story. You are playing a role. Maybe character levelling game is more appropriate?

On the previous page, I wrote:

I think the whole 'role' part of RPG is being over thought. Yes, all games require you to play a role, but the tag we attach to a game doesn't really matter as much as us all having a fairly decent idea of what it means. As an example, once upon a time 'indie' in music meant 'signed to an independent record label', these days the term is more synonymous with a particular type of guitar-based pop music. Does this mean we should change the word 'indie'?Â

Spoiler:

No.

JonB

So in summary, I've already taken all the best arguments.

Or, more likely...

regmcfly wrote:

I love popping into reading this thread - it's wonderfully circular, the House of Leaves of the B and B

Rev

Yossarian wrote:

revelthedog wrote:

RPG is an incorrect term anyways. Role playing game could be put against any game with a slight story. You are playing a role. Maybe character levelling game is more appropriate?

On the previous page, I wrote:

I think the whole 'role' part of RPG is being over thought. Yes, all games require you to play a role, but the tag we attach to a game doesn't really matter as much as us all having a fairly decent idea of what it means. As an example, once upon a time 'indie' in music meant 'signed to an independent record label', these days the term is more synonymous with a particular type of guitar-based pop music. Does this mean we should change the word 'indie'?Â

Spoiler:

I am awesome, everyone else GTFO.

I thought we were talking about changing the labels on games. I just got caught up in my own self importance... Again..

RamSteelwood

so that's a no for my classification system?

i think the main problem is the current classifications have been used and abused so much that they don't mean the same thing to everyone. Â An RPG to me is stats, grinding, probably random battles, and actions decided by 'dice rolls' rather than reflexes....that is definitely not Metroid.
then there's labelling anything played in first person as an 'FPS something'...calling Portal an FPS puzzler does it a massive disservice for me, as that sounds like a shooter with puzzles, and i'm not a big shooter fan. Â however describing it as a 'spacial awareness puzzler with a dark sense of humour and played from a first person perspective' isn't quite as catchy, but for me sounds like an interesting game.

Bollockoff

We could just label games based on the intended way you're meant to play them. Portal is first and foremost a puzzle game that happens to use a first person perspective.

hylian_elf

^that sounds good.

Thought of a long response to some stuff DR has been saying, but work is getting in the way. Bah, eh?

ChattinWithChet

Yossarian wrote:

dynamiteReady wrote:

ChattinWithChet wrote:

What I would like to add to this thing is to suggest that Metroid is far more Science Fiction than it is anything else and whatever its particular gameplay challenges are, I reckon this categorises it more effectively. As does putting Zelda in Fantasy.

That only tells you about the setting and story though, right?

Indeed, by far the least important aspect of any game IMO.

Eh, I don't know if it that's true as far as helping the player know what they are getting into, especially these days. Dead Space has all of these resource management, combat and puzzle elements but as an experience its status as Horror best describes it. I think what you do in it is far less important than the context in which you are doing it.

dynamiteReady

JonB wrote:

So in summary, I've already taken all the best arguments. Or, more likely...

I love popping into reading this thread - it's wonderfully circular, the House of Leaves of the B and B

For the record Jon, this...

TheDJR wrote:

The original Deus Ex was definitely an RPG because you couldn't hit shit without levelling up. This thread will never reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Won the thread.Â

Predated you by at least 50 posts too.Â
And (interestingly) still keeps an open mind on the discussion.

WhichÂ ultimately, was all I asked for.

Tempy

You could still say that calling me a thread nazi was a joke too

dynamiteReady

Dude... I'm very clear on the connotation.

I suspect that likening design theory to spiritual voidance, must have, at the time, seemed as funny to you, as my rather fuzzyÂ parallelÂ between social exclusion and fascism did to me.

Hahaha?

Tempy

I was pulling your leg originally, and you went all super serious on it, then I tried to politely get up ins the debate with my opinion but didn't really get a response other than 'it's already been said' (which is reasonable if dull) but neither was an attempt to shut down discussion, at all. It'd only work if my original comment had any power to shut down debate, which it didn't.

Short of it: I am sorry you thought I was being a prick and trying to have a go, I wasn't.

WorKid

And I thought my shoot 'em up joke won the thread.

dynamiteReady

On the real Tempy, you're one of my favourite posters on here*, so don't sweat it.

But seriously, Why can such a topic thrive elsewhere, but here?

*Disclaimer - I love most of you badgers anyway...Â so don't sweat it**.Â
**No homo.

Bollockoff

A gaming dictator needs to set in stone what he thinks everyone should generalise and then this wouldn't be an issue.

Because you'd get shot.

regmcfly

I'll make the decisions around here

RamSteelwood

i thought this thread went ok dynamite...then again i didn't notice people falling out either until the apologies and hugging started so maybe i wasn't paying proper attention.

dynamiteReady

All I wanted, was to just explore game design itself a little more. : (Â

I mean, since starting this thread, I've found shit loads of info on the subject.
Some official, terse, academic shit... some weeaboo nut hugging, and some gems like this...

Symmetric vs. Asymmetric

In a symmetric game, options are the same for each side. Symmetry in a game begins to break down very rapidly in longer games, where players have different strategic options, so most symmetric games are short, or rely more heavily on tactics than long-term strategy.

Asymmetric games are those games where the players do not stand on equal ground. Different options provide different advantages and disadvantages to each player. Because a head on attack is more advantages for one player does not mean it is as advantageous for another player. Rock is no longer on the same level with Paper or Scissors.

Symmetry implies balance. If both players have an equal set of options (or equal odds) then only their individual skill levels or decisions will determine their success. On the other hand, Asymmetry does not preclude balance--an asymmetric game can still have statistical balance, even if the individual options are not balanced against one another.

Very few games are wholly symmetric or wholly asymmetric. They overlap and diverge in many different places.

Developmental Asymmetry

â€œIf everyone has the same specialization options, the game is balanced.â€

Just because we start on even ground doesn't mean that we're going to stay there. Even if all players have equal starting positions doesn't mean that they will for the duration of the game. In a game like Chess, there are no new units, no new powersâ€”symmetry is unbroken. In a game like Civilization, however, after the first few tech tree decisions or culture merits, the game is no longer symmetric. It has crossed into the realm where players are now on different footing than one another, based upon their strategic decisions.

Such a system is inherently balanced in the statistical senseâ€”everyone has the same choices available, thus they all can follow the same path to victory. For a game with developmental asymmetry to be interesting, the developmental options must also be balanced against one another, so they are all valid choices.

Pretty similar to what you started doing on the previous page...

Tabasco -Â http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/636692/game-balance-symmetry-vs-asymmetry

I thought it was a cool subject...

Yossarian

I think Knight's linked to that, or something to that effect, before in the Halo thread,

dynamiteReady

Doesn't make it any less relevant. In fact, it just reaffirms it's value.

Yossarian

I'm not saying it's not relevant, just pointing out overlapping interests. If you also spend a lot of time thinking about the negative impacts of bloom/BR spread/armour lock and constantly available sprint on gameplay, you two should get together for a date.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories